Hearing to continue next month for Baldwin-Whitehall bus driver
The preliminary hearing for a Baldwin-Whitehall bus driver was continued from Feb. 25 to March 18 at Magistrate Judge Beth S. Mills' court.
The hearing for William H. Scherz Sr., 73, of Brentwood, who is charged with sexual assault, involuntary sexual intercourse, indecent exposure and other offenses, was continued at the request of his lawyer, Michael Santicola, according to court records.
Scherz could not be reached at his home for comment.
Scherz was arrested in January after police said he met a 15-year-old boy through a telephone dating service and then assaulted him in the boy's home.
The boy met Scherz in December on Megamate, a telephone dating service, according to a criminal complaint. The boy told Scherz that he was 18 and the two agreed to meet, but when Scherz arrived at the boy's home in Elizabeth on Jan. 22, he acknowledged he is 15, the complaint said.
Scherz tried to kiss the boy, who pushed Scherz away, police said. Scherz then sexually assaulted the boy, police said.
Scherz was released from the Allegheny County Jail on Jan. 24 after posting $10,000 bond.
Scherz is a 10-year employee of the district. He is on voluntary leave from work.
He was not on duty when the reported incident occurred.
Laura Van Wert is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-388-5814 or at 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.