Share This Page

Bond motion continued for suspect in Monessen homicide

| Saturday, Feb. 9, 2013, 12:01 a.m.

A request for nominal bond on behalf of a Duquesne woman charged with homicide for allegedly helping to purchase ammunition was continued Friday until a hearing could be scheduled.

Attorneys for Chalsee L. Hughes, 20, of High Street, had filed the bond motion after a preliminary hearing was rescheduled twice at the request of prosecutors. A motion was filed earlier this week for Hughes's release for lack of evidence, and Judge Al Bell ordered that the bond motion be continued until both matters can be addressed during the same hearing.

Hughes is accused of helping to purchase the bullets used in a Dec. 3 armed robbery in which Chris Fincik, 36, was shot to death in his Monessen home. She is charged with homicide, conspiracy to commit homicide, robbery and conspiracy to commit robbery.

Assistant District Attorney Thomas Grace argued that homicide is a nonbailable offense, and Bell agreed.

Facing the same charges in the case, along with three counts of aggravated assault and conspiracy to commit aggravated assault, is Earl V. Pinkney, 19, of Chestnut Street, Monessen. Last month, Pinkney and Hughes were ordered to stand trial by District Judge Joseph Dalfonso.

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 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.