Everson man charged in Connellsville police chase
Almost 20 charges have been filed against an Everson man who led police on a chase through Connellsville in May that ended in a collision with a police vehicle.
Jeffrey D. Lauffer, 41, of 626 Painter St. has been jailed in Fayette County since July 16 with bail set at $50,000. He faces charges of driving under the influence, fleeing or attempting to elude police, recklessly endangering another person, resisting arrest and numerous traffic offenses.
About 5 p.m. on May 30, Connellsville police responded to a reckless driver complaint and saw a silver Chevrolet Camaro operated by Lauffer speeding on South Pittsburgh Street. Lauffer led police on a chase to East Crawford Avenue, where the car abruptly stopped, causing the police car to strike it, according to court papers. Lauffer continued along East Crawford to Snyder Street, driving through a red light and weaving through traffic until he struck a guard rail along Route 711.
Lauffer was ejected, and his rib was fractured. His passenger, Charles Smith Jr., attempted to flee but was apprehended.
Smith told police that he and Lauffer had been drinking alcohol and shooting heroin, and that Lauffer refused to stop during the chase because he was intoxicated.
Lauffer's blood-alcohol content was 0.272 percent, nearly four times the legal limit of 0.08 percent, and his urine contained cocaine and opiates, police said. No charges were filed against Smith.
A preliminary hearing for Lauffer is scheduled Wednesday at Connellsville District Judge Ronald Haggerty Jr.'s office.
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.