Most serious charge against Ligonier Borough man in threats on doctor dropped
The most serious charge against a Ligonier Borough man accused of threatening to kill a doctor was withdrawn on Friday, according to his attorney.
The Westmoreland County District Attorney's office dropped an attempted homicide charge filed against Paul R. Sieminkewicz, 54, of 105 N. Walnut St. and formerly of 1661 Piper Road in Ligonier Township, according to attorney Dennis Rafferty.
Sieminkewicz then waived his right to a preliminary hearing before Ligonier District Judge Denise Thiel on terroristic threats and harassment charges.
Rafferty declined further comment.
Police said Sieminkewicz, an electrician, went to David Anto's home about 5 p.m. Oct. 19 and asked a woman where he could find the doctor.
The woman told authorities that Sieminkewicz got out of his truck “in an aggressive manner” and had his hand in his front pocket, “appearing to conceal a weapon,” according to a police affidavit.
When the woman told Sieminkewicz that Anto wasn't home, Sieminkewicz told her he was going to find and kill Anto, authorities said.
Township police pulled over Sieminkewicz on Route 711 near the Ligonier Camp and Conference Center. He told police he had a gun in the glove box.
Officers found a Taurus handgun in a holster and 11 rounds of 9mm ammunition in his vehicle, according to the affidavit.
Sieminkewicz told police he was “having some problems with his wife, but that she was at her mother's,” according to the affidavit written by Officer Amber Noel.
“I also asked him if he was having any issues with Dr. Anto, (and) he just stated that he ‘was going to find out,'” Noel said.
Thiel changed Sieminkewicz's bond from $25,000 straight, which he had posted, to $25,000 unsecured.
Bob Stiles is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-836-6622 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.