ShareThis Page

Forward Township hostage situation diffused

| Thursday, July 7, 2011

A Forward Township man was taken into police custody after he allegedly barricaded himself in his home with a firearm and threatened family members.

Robert Klimkos, 50, was apprehended by police early Wednesday afternoon after he allegedly threatened two sisters who live with him in a residence in the 2700 block of Pangburn Hollow Road with a loaded shotgun.

"He was threatening to kill everyone in the house and everyone who comes to the house," said Forward Township police Sgt. Glenn Fine, who was among the officers responding to the call. Fine said Klimkos had cut phone lines in the home and had attempted to choke one of his sisters.

The sisters were able to flee from Klimkos to the home of a neighbor.

Forward Township and Elizabeth police formed a perimeter around the home and ordered Klimkos out.

Klimkos exited the house without the weapon and sat down on a yard swing where police then took him into custody.

The Allegheny County SWAT Team had been called about the incident but the call was canceled after the standoff ended.

The loaded shotgun Klimkos is alleged to have used was located in the home as were several other unloaded rifles and shotguns, Fine said.

Klimkos was taken to Jefferson Regional Medical Center for evaluation. Fine said criminal charges against Klimkos are pending.

"Fortunately he came out and didn't do anything with the shotgun," Fine said.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.