Self-defense cited in Murrysville Wal-Mart fight
A Westmoreland County judge will decide whether a fight more than a year ago in front of the Murrysville Wal-Mart store constituted a felony assault.
The lawyer for Robert Crise argued in court Thursday that Crise was not the aggressor in the altercation that left 44-year-old Jamey Campbell of Latrobe hospitalized for three days with a concussion.
“This is a self-defense case, and the video clearly shows Mr. Campbell advancing on my client,” said defense attorney Jeff Leonard.
Crise, 39, of Delmont was charged with aggravated assault, simple assault and harassment in the Dec. 1, 2012 altercation. Police said Crise was upset over being cut off as his vehicle entered the store's parking lot. He approached Campbell and punched him, police reported.
Assistant District Attorney Chuck Washburn said Crise should face an aggravated assault charge because Campbell suffered serious bodily injuries in the fight.
“It's a case of road rage that led to an aggravated assault and someone that was seriously injured,” Washburn said.
Judge Richard E. McCormick Jr. refused to give Washburn additional time to produce medical evidence to substantial the assault charge.
Washburn was ordered by two judges last year to turn over Campbell's medical records to the defense, McCormick said. As of Thursday, those records had not been produced.
As a result, the judge will rule on a defense request to dismiss one count of aggravated assault based on testimony given at a preliminary hearing last year and his review of a one-minute video that shows the confrontation.
The trial could be scheduled for later this year.
Rich Cholodofsky is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-830-6293 or email@example.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 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.