Driver pulled from creek in Fox Chapel
A driver is extricated by emergency rescue personnel from his vehicle after he drove into a creek next to Squaw Run Road in Fox Chapel on Friday morning, June 21, 2013. After being removed from his car, the driver was transported to UPMC Presbyterian hospital in Pittsburgh by Foxwall EMS.
Photo by Kenn Cortese | For the Valley News Dispatch
A Shaler man who said he fell asleep at the wheel drove his Mercedes off Squaw Run Road and into a creek Friday morning in Fox Chapel.
Fox Chapel police Chief David Laux said Roger Griffith, 71, suffered cuts and bruises when his car went down a 12-foot embankment and rolled over onto its passenger side in the creek at the intersection of Squaw Run and Field Club roads about 7:45 a.m.
Laux said passing motorists and township road department workers who happened to be driving past were helping Griffith when police arrived. Griffith was conscious and alert and told police he had fallen asleep.
Laux said witness statements support what Griffith said.
Griffith was wearing a seat belt and was not believed to have been speeding. He was not impaired and there were no mechanical problems with his car, Laux said. No charges are expected to be filed.
Griffith was taken to UPMC Presbyterian hospital in Pittsburgh by ambulance for treatment.
Brian C. Rittmeyer is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org or 724-226-4701.
More Valley News Dispatch
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.