Share This Page

Washington Township murder suspect says killers passed him in SUV

| Wednesday, Sept. 18, 2013, 12:01 a.m.

Eric Hall told a Westmoreland County jury on Tuesday he believes his friends' killer sped past him as he drove up the driveway to their Washington Township home to buy drugs two years ago.

Hall, 30, of Ligonier, who is on trial on two counts of homicide, testified for more than two hours, claiming he stumbled upon the bodies of Anthony Henderson and Noelle Richards, panicked and feared for his life.

Henderson and Richards, both 24, were shot to death on Aug. 28, 2011, in the home they shared. Prosecutors contend Hall fired the fatal shots and beat Henderson with a baseball bat before leaving with his wallet.

“I walked around the couch and there was somebody on the couch. They were in a sitting position, I didn't recognize who it was,” Hall testified. “I could see Tony facedown on the floor beside the couch as well.”

Hall told jurors he drove more than 30 miles from Ligonier to buy marijuana for himself and cocaine for his friend, Jeremy Springer.

Springer testified against Hall earlier on Tuesday.

As he drove up Henderson's driveway, Hall said, a large, silver-colored sport utility vehicle sped past him. After he found the bodies, he saw three men at the door.

“I thought they thought I would recognize them and they came back to kill me,” Hall told the jury. He testified he grabbed a baseball bat and chased the men, hitting two with the bat, before he was able to escape.

Those men testified last week that they had gone to the house to purchase marijuana from Henderson when they were attacked by Hall.

Hall broke down in tears at several points during his testimony, once as he explained how he found the bodies and again toward the end of his questioning from defense attorney Michael DeMatt.

“There was not a thought in my mind about calling the police. I just beat up three guys who I thought killed my friend,” Hall testified.

Hall attempted to explain key parts of the prosecution's case against him, telling jurors he didn't realize he had Henderson's wallet and accidentally dropped it outside his home in Ligonier.

Hall said he threw his bloody clothes and the baseball bat along Route 30 as he drove home. He told jurors he disposed of a 9 mm handgun that police believe was the murder weapon after he borrowed it from his mother as a defense against Henderson's unknown killers.

Hall testified he threw the gun in the trash a day after police searched his home and did not find it. The gun was never recovered.

“Did you kill Tony Henderson?” DeMatt asked.

“No,” Hall replied.

“Did you kill Noelle Richards?”

“No,” Hall said.

The defense showed jurors the gray Nike sneakers Hall said he wore to Henderson's home that night. The prosecution has said a bloody footprint found on Henderson's body likely was left by someone wearing an Adidas shoe.

Springer testified Hall told him a day after the murders that he found the bodies but was reluctant to go to police.

“I asked him to go talk to someone, but he was very nervous and didn't want to,” Springer testified.

Hall will return to the witness stand on Wednesday morning to be cross-examined by prosecutors when the trial reconvenes before Judge Rita Hathaway.

The prosecution completed its case against Hall on Tuesday. The case, which included testimony from 25 witnesses and 220 exhibits, focused on circumstantial evidence that placed Hall at the scene of the murders.

Rich Cholodofsky is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-830-6293 or rcholodofsky@tribweb.com.

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.