ShareThis Page

Alleged crooked Greensburg contractor facing trial

| Saturday, Oct. 19, 2013, 12:06 a.m.
William Rager
William Rager

A Greensburg man accused of scamming several Washington Township residents out of thousands of dollars for sewage work will face trial in Fayette County Court of Common Pleas.

William Rager, 34, of 110 Cannon Drive waived his right Friday to a preliminary hearing in 11 of 12 cases before Magisterial District Judge Jesse Cramer in Belle Vernon.

Washington Township police originally charged Rager August, but added an additional case Tuesday on charges of theft by deception-false impression and receiving stolen property.

Rager allegedly failed to construct a number of sewer lines throughout the township.

Rager has been in Westmoreland County Prison in Hempfield Township since Sept. 20, the day state police arrested him on outstanding warrants for drug charges out of Westmoreland County as well as the warrants issued by Cramer on charges related to the sewer work.

Cramer set bail at $50,000 straight cash bond for each of 10 criminal complaints township police filed last month.

Rager allegedly accepted money from residents and signed agreement to tap lines to the main sewer lines from July 26 to Oct. 29, 2012, but never returned to do the work.

Repeated attempts by residents to contact Rager were unsuccessful leading to the charges being filed. The payments he received ranged from $400 to $7,950. Police did not release the names of the alleged victims.

Many of the alleged victims appeared at Cramer's office prepared to testify in a potential hearing.

One of the cases against Rager was withdrawn by the prosecution because it was deemed to be a civil matter.

Jeremy Sellew is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at jsellew@tribweb.com or 724-684-2667.

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.