Man from PNC fracas posted to YouTube gets probation
By Bobby Kerlik
Published: Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 3:08 p.m.
A Friendship man whose confrontation with Pittsburgh police at PNC Park became an Internet sensation will spend two years on probation.
The judge who sentenced Scott Ashley, 42, admonished him for his behavior at the Pirates game April 9, 2011.
"It's not a place to be an (expletive)," Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge David R. Cashman, an ardent baseball fan, told Ashley. "It's a place to have a nice time."
Ashley pleaded guilty to one count each of simple assault, resisting arrest and summary harassment. Police zapped Ashley with a Taser and smacked him with batons after he refused their commands to leave the ballpark. A video of the confrontation surfaced on YouTube, where it has been viewed tens of thousands of times.
Cashman also banned Ashley from PNC Park for the duration of his probation and ordered him to have a drug and alcohol evaluation and to undergo random drug screening. He also is to have no contact with any of the PNC Park security officers involved in the incident.
Pittsburgh police Officers Frank Rende and Jeff LaBella said they were pleased with the tongue-lashing Cashman gave Ashley.
"I thought it was great. The judge lectured him pretty hard," Rende said. "I'm just glad it's done. Hopefully people learn from this. It put us in a bad light nationally."
Ashley and his attorney, Fred Rabner, declined to comment after the hearing.
Rabner told the judge that Ashley wasn't proud of the incident.
"It's not the proudest moment of his life. Today he stands before you remorseful," Rabner said.
Ashley did not say anything to the judge except that he was pleading guilty "because I am guilty."
Ashley was dressed in a polo shirt, not his red, white and blue jacket that prompted fans at the game to chant "USA, USA" during the incident.
Show commenting policy
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.