Greensburg Tuesday takes
And the lesson?: Two of six suspects arrested for a spree of arsons in Jeannette over four years pleaded guilty and have been sentenced accordingly. But does either realize the lives endangered by such recklessness? Probably not. When asked about this by Judge Debra Pezze, Jeffrey Robert Tierney Jr., 24, replied, “I didn't think about that.” We doubt he was thinking about much of anything by engaging in such idiotic behavior. Consider this a wake-up call.
Roadmasters & reason: The election of a Unity Township supervisor this year has reopened a perennial issue that needs to be closed: the dual role of township supervisors serving as “roadmasters.” It's a throwback to an earlier era when supervisors' primary responsibility was road maintenance. Many locales in recent years have distinguished their leaders from their municipal employees. It's high time Unity catches up to the times and does the same.
Not so fast: A Fayette couple accused of breaking the ribs among other bones of their 7-week-old premature twins would have avoided any jail time under a pathetic plea bargain. What Kristen N. Eicher, 21, and Earl J. Ritenour, 22, got was a less-than-pleased sentencing judge, who flatly rejected the deal in light of what he called the children's “horrific injuries.” Added Judge John F. Wagner Jr., “Do I look like I just fell off the turnip truck?”
Show commenting policy
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.