Attorney predicts Elizabeth Forward director will be cleared of charges
An Elizabeth Forward school director's attorney believes his client will be exonerated of a charge of receiving stolen property.
“A police report can be drafted in a way that sounds more damning than it is,” Jefferson Hills attorney Charles LoPresti said about the case against Francis J. Posa, 47, of Elizabeth.
On March 11 Posa and his girlfriend, Linda Lee Baker, 41, of West Mifflin were arraigned on charges stemming from the theft of jewelry and coins from the Port Vue home of Baker's mother.
Police said Baker's mother was staying with one of her other daughters while recovering from a surgical procedure.
According to an Allegheny County police affidavit, Posa sold two gold coins to a dealer in Elizabeth while the couple tried to sell jewelry and coins at a dealer in Belle Vernon.
“In the end I think there will be a very logical explanation that will exonerate him from any criminal responsibility,” LoPresti said at Elizabeth Forward's school offices where the district board of directors was meeting.
LoPresti was there to deal with any comment that might be made about the Port Vue case, but there was no mention of it during nearly two hours of discussion about budgetary and other district business.
The district officially has had no comment about the case.
Baker was charged with felony counts of burglary, receiving stolen property and theft by unlawful taking. LoPresti said he is not her attorney.
Posa is free on nonmonetary bond while Baker is in Allegheny County Jail in lieu of $10,000 bond, both pending a Tuesday hearing before Magisterial District Judge Armand Martin in Glassport.
Patrick Cloonan is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-664-9161, ext. 1967, 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.