North Union man's hearing continued in double-stabbing case
The preliminary hearing on Tuesday for a North Union man accused of stabbing two brothers during a fight in a Dunbar Township field has been continued until next week.
Elijah Caine Boyer, 23, of 11 Milton St., was charged with two counts each of attempted homicide, aggravated assault and simple assault, and one count of terroristic threats.
He allegedly stabbed brothers Cody and Travis Burnsworth.
Police said a woman's request to guzzle beer while suspended upside down over a keg at a party of about 50 people led to the double stabbing on April 27.
Travis Burnsworth objected to the woman guzzling beer in that manner, which caused a minor fight to break out, police said.
Travis and Cody Burnsworth told police they were stabbed when they confronted the man who allegedly punched the woman.
Boyer told police that the Burnsworth brothers were arguing with his brother, Josiah Boyer, when he intervened.
Elijah Boyer told police he threatened to stab the Burnsworths if they harmed his brother and the two were backing away when “four or five men began to punch him in the head and face.”
Elijah Boyer told police he then pulled out the knife “and started swinging it at the males,” according to the complaint. He fled into a wooded area and left in a van.
The Burnsworth brothers were taken to UPMC Presbyterian hospital in Pittsburgh for treatment.
The hearing was continued to 10:30 a.m. May 14 before District Judge Dwight Shaner.
Boyer is lodged in Fayette County Prison in lieu of $40,000 bond.
Mark Hofmann is a reporter for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at email@example.com or 724-626-3539.
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.