Charges dropped against California man who shot little brother
Criminal charges against a Washington County man accused of shooting his 12-year-old brother were dismissed to spare the victim from testifying, a Fayette County prosecutor said Tuesday.
“I spoke to the family, and neither they nor the child want to proceed because they feel it will be traumatic to the child and will change the family relationship,” Assistant District Attorney J.W. Eddy said after the charges were dismissed against David Brooks.
“Out of respect for the family and the child, we dismissed the charges,” Eddy said.
Brooks, 19, of 205 Fifth St., California, was charged with aggravated assault, simple assault, reckless endangerment and carrying a firearm without a license in connection with the Sept. 30 incident.
Uniontown police said Brooks was in his father‘s residence at 201 S. Mt. Vernon Ave. at 7:38 p.m. when he shot his 12-year-old brother, Timothy.
David Brooks told police that he was taking a gun out of his pocket when it went off.
The bullet struck Timothy's left hand, breaking it in two places, then lodged in his stomach, according to a criminal complaint.
The boy was flown to Children‘s Hospital of Pittsburgh, where he underwent multiple surgeries, according to the complaint filed by city police.
A preliminary hearing was to be held last month on the charges, but it was postponed when Timothy appeared reluctant to testify. The boy, whose left hand was in a cast, last month left the courtroom in tears.
Liz Zemba is a reporter for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at email@example.com or 412-601-2166.
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.