Share This Page

Derry Township woman again charged with harassment of Westmoreland County District Attorney Peck

| Saturday, April 5, 2014, 12:01 a.m.

A Derry Township woman has been charged for the second time in recent weeks with leaving threatening messages for Westmoreland County District Attorney John Peck, filling his voice mail with obscene messages and sending him lewd caricatures, police said on Friday.

Michele Levendosky, 44, of Bradenville is being held in the Westmoreland County jail on $20,000 bail on charges of multiple counts of harassment. She was released last week on $5,000 bond on similar charges.

Levendosky allegedly inundated Peck's office with calls and voice mails between March 3 and 8, police said. Some of her voice messages lasted for as long as five minutes, according to the charges. Most of the calls were laced with profanity.

She was outraged that detectives called her employer to trace the phone calls, according to court records.

Despite warning her to stop the threats and harassment, Westmoreland County Detective Paul Burkey said, the phone calls continued to the point that no one else could leave messages with other staffers in the office.

Burkey said they are unsure exactly why she is upset with Peck. There is a reference in the charges to a vehicle accident and claims of her family's being “victimized.”

Richard Gazarik is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-830-6292 or at rgazarik@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.