Veteran accused in shooting at Washington grocery acted in self-defense, attorney says
There's no question an Army veteran of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq fatally shot a man in a Washington County parking lot, his attorney told a jury on Monday, but jurors should acquit him because he did it in self-defense.
The trial of Brandon Thomas, 32, of Upper St. Clair began in Washington County before a crowded courtroom. A jury of six men and six women must decide whether the former staff sergeant was justified in killing Vaughn Simonelli, 55, of Chartiers after a driving incident on Oct. 18, 2012, outside the Shop 'n Save in Washington.
Thomas is charged with homicide and three counts of possessing drug paraphernalia.
Calling Simonelli an “angry, deranged person,” Thomas' attorney, Frank Walker, said his client was defending himself following an argument that Simonelli started.
“As a self-defense-trained veteran, he pulls out a lawfully concealed firearm to defend himself,” Walker said of Thomas.
Prosecutors don't see it that way. First Assistant District Attorney Chad Schneider is seeking a conviction of first- or third-degree murder or manslaughter. He said Simonelli was shot once in the shoulder and once in the back.
“(Thomas) also had packets used for heroin transportation in his boot,” Schneider said.
Recollections of what happened differed among witnesses who testified. Prosecutors contend Thomas drove recklessly down the center turning lane on Jefferson Avenue in a black Hummer, passing cars until he got to a red light.
Simonelli, who was behind Thomas at the light, got out of his car and yelled at Thomas.
When the light turned green, Thomas drove off and turned into the supermarket parking lot. Simonelli followed and blocked in Thomas' vehicle once he pulled into a spot.
Roger Anderson, 71, testified he walked out of the store and saw both men out of their cars, arguing. He said Thomas was saying he had to leave because he had a family member in the hospital and went to get into his Hummer.
“(Simonelli) approached the door and said, ‘You're not going nowhere,' and he threw a punch,” Anderson said. “Then, I heard two shots immediately after. I ran over and said, ‘You didn't have to shoot him.' ”
John McGary, 73, who was heading to the grocery store, said he heard the argument and saw Thomas waving his gun — a Ruger pistol — over Simonelli's head.
“(Thomas) was using the F-word, saying, ‘I have a child in the hospital, and I have to get out of here.' He put his gun in his holster and went toward his Hummer. Once the fella got in the Hummer, the other man started toward him,” said McGary, who heard shots seconds later.
Thomas has a wife and three children. Walker said his client made up the story about the sick child to get away from Simonelli.
Thomas has support from former comrades, said Army Warrant Officer Jeremiah Minor, who plans to testify on Tuesday as a character witness.
The two served together in the 173rd Airborne Infantry in Afghanistan, where Minor said Thomas saved his life. Their platoon came under heavy Taliban fire and Minor was the forward observer, whose job was to give coordinates of incoming fire to Thomas, who was returning mortar fire.
“Everyone was duck-and-cover, but he stood by my side and waited for me to get my coordinates. If he would have left me, there would have been no one to return fire,” said Minor, 36, who drove from Cincinnati for the trial.
Minor and Walker said Thomas was honorably discharged in 2010 and has three Purple Heart medals.
Minor views the case as clear-cut self-defense.
“Any soldier in his situation would have done the exact same thing,” Minor said. “If he was a little old lady, we wouldn't be here.”
Bobby Kerlik is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7886 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.
- Consumer, core prices inch up
- Pitt offense eyes healthy balance
- Flyers continue mastery of Penguins at Consol
- Karns City soccer teams advance
- Steelers’ defense on pace for fewest sacks in 16-game season
- Leader Times Q&A: Redbank Valley’s Wyatt Hetrick
- Starkey: Century mark beckons for Ben
- SEC approves looser mortgage lending guidelines
- Contempt citation sought by state against Highmark for alleged violation of deal with UPMC
- The Leader eager for Kittanning finale
- Highmark seeks double-digit increase for more benefits, heavy use