Sexual assault allegation hearing postponed for White Oak doctor
A White Oak-based physician accused of sexually assaulting his patients will have to wait for his day in court.
Raja Chakrapani's preliminary hearing before Magisterial District Judge Thomas Miller was postponed on Monday afternoon to Sept. 23 at 1:30 p.m. at the defense's request.
Chakrapani, 59, of Fox Chapel is charged with four counts of indecent assault and two counts of harassment.
A woman came to the White Oak police station on July 11 and reported Chakrapani sexually assaulted her on multiple occasions, and another woman went to police on July 18 with a similar complaint, according to court documents filed by Allegheny County police.
The first woman told investigators about several incidents including when Chakrapani allegedly grabbed her face and attempted to kiss her while she was sitting on the exam table, and inappropriately rubbed his body against her on a separate occasion.
The second woman told investigators Chakrapani massaged her breasts without consent, and rubbed his privates on her leg for several minutes without consent during another exam.
Chakrapani's other offices are in West Mifflin, Turtle Creek, Swissvale and at UPMC Mercy.
Allegheny County and White Oak police said at least one additional complaint is being considered.
Michael DiVittorio is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-664-9161, ext. 1965, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
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.