Police accuse McKees Rocks man in fatal shooting on Fourth of July
Pittsburgh police used a nickname database to zero in on a suspect in a fatal shooting at a Fourth of July barbecue in Homewood, court records show.
Police obtained an arrest warrant on Monday for Zachary Threats, 36, of McKees Rocks, charging him with homicide, carrying a gun without a license and burglary.
He is accused of shooting Kaamil Arnold, 30, as Arnold brought food into the kitchen of his Tioga Street home about 3:15 p.m. Friday.
Witnesses told police the man, later identified as Threats, was able to get into the home because Arnold had the door propped open, according to a criminal complaint. The witnesses told police that they heard the nickname of the shooter was “Ouga,” the complaint said.
Detectives used the police computer database of nicknames to find someone who goes by “Ouga” and produced a photo array of eight black males with similar features, the complaint said.
Witnesses chose the photo of Threats from the array. Pittsburgh police on Tuesday also charged Threats with simple assault, possessing instruments of crime and being a defiant trespasser.
Threats hadn't been taken into custody as of Tuesday afternoon, according to court filings.
He is awaiting trial on charges of aggravated assault, carrying a gun without a license, defiant trespass and other crimes stemming from an April 2013 incident, and charges of gun possession, receiving stolen property and possession of marijuana from a July 2012 incident.
Both cases are scheduled for trial in August.
Margaret Harding is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
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.