Girl mistaken for skunk and shot in Beaver County still in critical condition
The 8-year-old girl who was shot when she apparently was mistaken for a skunk during a weekend Halloween bonfire at the home of a relative in Beaver County remained hospitalized in critical condition on Monday.
Thomas Grant of Jackson Center, Mercer County, told police that he shot at what appeared to be a skunk in the backyard of his mother's home on Brewer Road in New Sewickley, township police Chief Ronald Leindecker said.
“The juvenile victim was wearing a black Halloween costume with a white feather on the hat,” Leindecker said in a prepared statement.
The shooting occurred shortly after 8 p.m. Saturday.
Janet Grant told police that “she had received reports of a skunk in the backyard and had requested (that her son) shoot the skunk,” Leindecker said.
“Mr. Grant retrieved his shotgun from the residence and proceeded to the backyard,” the chief said.
“Thomas Grant stated that his mother was holding a flashlight over a hillside and Mr. Grant (armed with a shotgun) shot at what appeared to be a skunk.”
When police arrived, emergency medical personnel and family members were treating the girl. She was flown to Children's Hospital in Pittsburgh. Authorities did not release her name.
Township police and state Game Commission officials must finish talking to witnesses and gathering evidence before authorities determine if criminal charges are warranted, Leindecker said.
Michael Hasch is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7820 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.