Allegheny County building security guard accused of raping co-worker
An Allegheny County building security guard is accused of raping an off-duty co-worker while he was working a night shift at the county Health Department.
Donnell A. Stewart, 31, of Penn Hills is charged with rape and related crimes in the incident that the woman said occurred after she left her job at 10 p.m. June 29 and drove to meet him for a date at the Oakland facility.
“Obviously, we deny any and all wrongdoing,” Stewart's attorney, Casey White, said Wednesday. “My client has never had any negative police interaction. Clearly, this is against his nature. We look forward to presenting his defense.”
According to the criminal complaint filed on Monday:
The woman said she went with Stewart into a back room where they had a consensual sex act. At that time, she said, Stewart said he was going to give her some money and put the cash on a table. When Stewart wanted to have a different sex act, she said she refused, even after he offered to give her more money.
She said he placed a stun gun against her neck and even though it did not shock her, the force caused her to fall. She said he produced a second stun gun and forced her to have sex.
Stewart, who was hired in June 2005 and has an annual salary of $34,673, has been suspended without pay pending further review, said county spokeswoman Amie M. Downs.
Michael Hasch is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7820 or email@example.com. Staff writer Bobby Kerlik contributed to this report.
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.
- 71-year-old among 2 charged in several Pittsburgh area burglaries
- New Kensington residents vent anger at council meeting
- Pittsburgh Mayor Peduto says new police chief’s skills fit the job well
- Four issues that the Steelers need to take care of in September
- Steel Center celebrates 50 years
- Elizabeth Township Commissioners approve phone system upgrade
- State police probe trooper’s arrest at Pittsburgh wedding
- New Allegheny Valley Joint Sewage Authority manager welcomes challenge
- Lambo no longer in limbo with Pirates
- Wainwright, Cardinals rough up Locke in 6-4 victory over Pirates
- Principals question role of test scores in new evaluation process