ShareThis Page

Love triangle considered in slaying of Seneca Valley High School teacher

| Friday, July 26, 2013, 12:34 a.m.
Seneca Valley High school teacher Steven Russo

A man who committed suicide last month by blowing himself up had been a suspect in the murder of a popular Seneca Valley High School teacher, according to court documents and investigators.

The documents, recently unsealed, name Richard Laszczynski, 46, of Hampton as a suspect in the killing of Steven Russo, 48, who was found shot to death in his home in Lancaster, Butler County, on Nov. 24, 2010.

State police and Butler County District Attorney Richard Goldinger said they're not ready to declare the case solved and closed with Laszczynski's death.

“Evidence points to a certain suspect at this point, but we're not ruling anyone out,” Goldinger said.

State police laid out a case against Laszczynski when submitting an affidavit for a search warrant. State police wrote that probable cause exists to identify Laszczynski as being responsible for Russo's death.

Investigators were awaiting the result of one more forensic test to decide whether they had enough evidence to file charges, Goldinger said Thursday.

The Allegheny County Medical Examiner ruled Laszczynski's death on June 27 a suicide from a self-inflicted blast to his head and neck with a homemade explosive device.

Attempts to reach Laszczynski's family for comment were not successful.

State police submitted an affidavit on May 9, 2011, for the search warrant. They asked that it be placed under seal because the investigation was ongoing.

State police on Thursday confirmed an electronic copy of the affidavit obtained by the Tribune-Review.

The thread linking Russo and Laszczynski was Heidi Smith, who dated Laszczynski for several months while she dated and lived with Russo, the documents stated.

“It was pretty obvious when you looked at all of this, from day one, we knew it wasn't someone off the street, it would be either an ex-husband or a jealous boyfriend,” said Jayme Russo, 49, of Butler Township, Russo's brother.

“We're not getting Steve back,” he said. “I don't know if you get any closure. (Laszczynski) is deceased, and you move on. We know there wasn't any random suspect other than this guy.”

Russo was shot to death one day after a break-in at the home.

According to the affidavit, signed by Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Ed Borkowski, Troopers Randolph Guy and John Stepansky said they believe that Laszczynski staged a burglary at the home on Nov. 23, 2010, and then returned the next day and shot Russo to death.

Troopers wrote that Laszczynski and Russo had been dating Smith at the same time. Smith, realizing Laszczynski was jealous, broke up with him on Nov. 14, 2010.

She could not be reached for comment.

“Laszczynski was emotionally distraught over the breakup and became angry,” troopers wrote. “He sent Smith a text message which stated, ‘You destroyed me.'”

Investigators don't believe that Smith was involved in the killing, Goldinger said.

Evidence showed that Laszczynski accessed Russo's calendar page through the Seneca Valley School District website, and video surveillance footage from the Log Cabin Inn near the Russo home showed a man who Smith said resembled Laszczynski walking toward Russo's house the day of the burglary and the day of the murder.

Court records showed that Laszczynski served time in federal prison for robbing the Warrendale post office in 1994. More recently, he was awaiting trial in Allegheny County Court on assault charges filed by Hampton police.

Bill Vidonic is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-380-5621 or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.