Oakmont standoff ends peacefully
A police standoff in Oakmont ended peacefully shortly after midnight today.
Officials said police surrounded a duplex at 121 California Ave. after a man involved in a domestic dispute would not open the door when police arrived about 9:50 p.m. Wednesday.
According to Oakmont Police Chief David DiSanti Sr., he shouted profanities and told them that if they didn't leave “a war would be on.”
That prompted police from at least four local departments and an Allegheny County SWAT team, including a sniper, to respond. Four neighboring homes were evacuated.
A few minutes after midnight, the man walked out of the house with his hands above his head. At least two infrared beams, apparently from police guns, could be seen pointed at his chest.
DiSanti would not identify the suspect minutes after the standoff ended. He said the man is in his 40s and is believed to be a military veteran.
Police say the man was not armed.
DiSanti said the man has been staying with a cousin, a woman who owns the residence. The chief said the ordeal started when she came out of the house and said she was in danger before going back in.
Oakmont Mayor Robert Fescemyer said a next-door neighbor heard the plea and called 911.
DiSanti said police spoke to the man during the standoff, in which he reported “having problems.”
The chief said the man will be evaluated in order to “get him the help he needs.”
Brian C. Rittmeyer and Braden Ashe are writers for Trib Total Media.
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.