Theft charges withdrawn against Monongahela mayor
Washington County District Attorney Eugene Vittone has withdrawn theft charges against Monongahela Mayor Robert Kepics and acknowledged that charges shouldn't have been filed because it is a civil matter.
Kepics, 56, was charged this week with theft by deception after a New Eagle couple filed a complaint with a district judge stating that he has failed to pay back a loan of nearly $4,000.
“After hearing the evidence, it was apparent to me that this was a civil and not a criminal matter and that a criminal charge should not have been filed,” Vittone said Friday.
Vittone explained that the charge requires an intent to deceive another person into parting with their money.
“The facts in this case show that Kepics made three loan payments...which demonstrates Kepics' intentions to pay back the loan.”
Kepics, who could not be reached for comment Friday, peviously said that he is on disability, which makes it difficult to pay back the loan.
He was arrested Tuesday after John and Shirley Amon filed a complaint with District Judge Mark Wilson stating that Kepics borrowed $3,935 from them on April 11, 2011.
They said he repaid $1,400 seven months later but has repeatedly failed to pay back the remainder, making only two payments of $100, the last one in September.
Vittone said he never approved the charge and that it had been approved by an assistant district attorney, Josh Carroll.
He said he has spoken to Carroll and will conduct “an immediate and thorough review of the case and the procedures that led to the filing of the charges.”
Kepics, a former Monongahela city councilman who was elected mayor in 2008, is an electrician who said his income is only $1,400 a month.
Michael Hasch is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7820 or 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.