Fayette boy won't be put on stand to testify against brother
A 12-year-old boy who police wanted to testify against his older brother for allegedly shooting him left a courtroom in tears on Tuesday.
“Why does he have to be in jail?” said Timothy Brooks as he left the office of Uniontown District Judge Michael Metros. “He didn't do nothing.”
Brooks' 19-year-old brother, David Brooks, of 205 Fifth St., California in Washington County is charged by Uniontown police with aggravated assault, simple assault, reckless endangerment and carrying a firearm without a license.
In a criminal complaint, city Detective Donald Gmitter said David Brooks was in his father's residence at 201 S. Mt. Vernon Ave. at 7:38 p.m. Sept. 30 when he shot his brother.
David Brooks told police that he was taking a gun out of his pocket when it went off.
The bullet struck Timothy Brooks in his left hand, breaking it in two places, before becoming lodged in his stomach, according to the criminal complaint.
The boy was flown to Children's Hospital of UPMC, where he underwent multiple surgeries, according to the complaint. The injured hand was in a cast when Timothy Brooks appeared Tuesday in court.
David Brooks told police he threw the gun and magazine into a creek near his house, but police were unable to find it, according to the complaint.
Timothy Brooks was to testify on Tuesday during a preliminary hearing, but the hearing was continued to 9:45 a.m. Dec. 11.
Assistant District Attorney J.W. Eddy said he needs the continuance so that the boy can be interviewed by a forensic interviewer instead of testifying. The results of that interview will be introduced at the hearing, Eddy said.
David Brooks is in Fayette County Jail, where he has been held since the shooting in lieu of $50,000 bond.
Liz Zemba is a reporter for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-601-2166 or email@example.com.
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.