Chief: Autopsy can't place cause of death
By Brigid Beatty
Published: Friday, Nov. 16, 2012, 12:36 a.m.
KITTANNING – An autopsy on a 69-year-old Kittanning man struck by a car in late October has proved to be inconclusive, said authorities.
John Shaffer was struck by a vehicle driven by former Kittanning councilwoman Elinor Weaver, 87, at 11:28 a.m. Oct. 25 at the corner of Vine and North McKean streets, said Ed Cassesse, police chief.
Cassesse said that blinding sunlight seemed to have played a part in the accident.
“She (Weaver) was at the stop sign and the sun was in front of her as she made the left turn onto Vine Street,” Cassesse said.
Weaver told Cassesse she didn't see Shaffer at the crosswalk.
He was knocked unconscious but revived at the scene and was transported to ACMH Hospital, then to a Pittsburgh Hospital.
Shaffer suffered 13 broken ribs, a broken collarbone and a broken leg, said Cassesse. He was released from hospital a week later and was sent to the Armstrong County Health Center for rehabilitation. He died at the center on Nov. 5.
Cassesse said Armstrong County Coroner Bob Bower told him that he could not determine whether the cause of death resulted from the accident or from a pre-existing medical condition.
Brigid Beatty is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 724-543-1303 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
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.