Fatal crash suspect from Washington Township accused of DUI again
A Washington Township man awaiting trial on charges of vehicular homicide for an incident in 2012, in which police say he was driving drunk, was arrested again for alleged drunken driving.
Chad Fravel, 26, of Route 356 was charged with DUI on Thursday after Vandergrift police said they observed him failing to stop at a stop sign. When he was pulled over, police said they smelled alcohol. According to police, a blood test revealed Fravel's blood-alcohol content was 0.123, well above the legal limit of 0.08.
Fravel was on bond, awaiting a trial scheduled for February on charges he was drunk when the truck he was driving was involved in a crash with another truck in Oklahoma Borough in April 2012.
Robert Lytle, 51, of Avonmore died in the accident. A passenger in his truck, Paul Lytle, 35, of Pittsburgh, was injured. Fravel was seriously injured in the crash.
According to police, Fravel left a bar on Thursday and drove through a stop sign just before police pulled him over.
For the 2012 incident, Fravel is charged with homicide by vehicle while DUI and aggravated assault by vehicle while DUI.
WPXI-TV contributed to this report.
Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.
Show commenting policy
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 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.