3 accused of stealing bronze vases from Lower Burrell cemetery
Police accuse two men and a woman of taking almost $89,000 worth of bronze vases from Greenwood Cemetery in Lower Burrell.
Daniel Scott Toy, 27, of Cirrincone Lane, Kittanning, and Brandi Jo Verner, 28, of Lincoln Street, Vandergrift, are accused of theft and receiving stolen property. Toy and Verner were in Armstrong County Jail on other charges.
Zechariah Berger, 20, of Columbia, Lancaster County, will be charged upon release from drug rehabilitation.
Police say the trio stole the vases in March and April to buy heroin.
Toy and Verner were arraigned on Wednesday for theft of more than 120 vases from the Melwood Road cemetery. They were ordered held in lieu of $50,000 bail each for a preliminary hearing next month by District Judge Cheryl Peck Yakopec.
Police say the three took the vases worth about $735 apiece to a Templeton scrap yard for cash.An employee of the business, Manor Metals, called state police to report that many vases were being brought there.
Manor Metals employees gave police copies of identification shown by the three and photocopies of receipts.
Verner allegedly told a dockworker that she got the vases from her grandfather's house and that he had used the vases to plant flowers.
According to arrest papers, the three went to the cemetery on several occasions between 5:30 and 11 a.m.
Verner and Toy were in the Armstrong County Jail for allegedly failing to comply with a judge's order. Verner also is accused of having drugs.
Chuck Biedka is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
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.