Man convicted of assault for hitting Fayette school crossing guard
A Fayette County man accused of hitting a school crossing guard with his car was convicted Tuesday of simple assault and reckless endangerment.
A jury deliberated for less than two hours before returning the guilty verdicts against Robert E. Welch, 34, of 160 First Ave., New Eagle. The jury acquitted Welch of a more serious charge of aggravated assault.
Edgar Jones on Monday testified he was working as a crossing guard in front of Marion Elementary School in Washington Township, on Jan. 3, 2008, when he saw a Pontiac Fiero speeding toward him. Jones testified he was holding up a stop sign so a bus could exit the school grounds when he saw the car and moved into its lane of traffic.
Jones, 65, of Washington Township, testified he was flown to a Pittsburgh hospital, where he was treated for fractured ribs and received 36 stitches to his forehead and 16 to his left knee.
Welch testified the brakes on his 1986 Fiero had been replaced a few weeks before. He told the jury they were functioning properly until he entered the school zone. The brakes began to work again after he left the school zone, he said.
He testified he did not see Jones and thought he had hit the rear of the bus. He said he was able to stop the car after pumping the brakes continuously.
Welch is to be sentenced 9:30 a.m. Friday before Judge Steve Leskinen.
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.