ShareThis Page

2 hospitalized after Pine shooting, standoff

| Monday, April 6, 2009

Two people were hospitalized with gunshot wounds Sunday after a domestic incident in a quiet Pine neighborhood escalated into a three-hour standoff with police.

Northern Regional police Chief Bob Amann said Lynne Agnew apparently shot her ex-husband, Daniel K. Agnew, multiple times before locking herself inside a home in the 500 block of Salem Heights Drive around 5:40 p.m. Sunday. Agnew, a licensed surgeon, was found lying in a neighbor's yard.

A spokesman for Allegheny General Hospital in the North Side said Daniel Agnew was being treated there last night. A condition report was not available.

Lynne Agnew, a photographer who Amann said lives in Shadyside, surrendered to police after they entered her home about three hours after the shooting. Allegheny County SWAT teams and police blocked off Salem Heights Drive and at times communicated with Lynne Agnew over a bullhorn.

Lynne Agnew suffered a gunshot wound to the chest and was taken to a local hospital, Amann said. Amann, who did not know her condition, said police did not whether the wound was self-inflicted.

The Agnews have two children, who Amann said were not inside the home at the time of the shooting. Amann said domestic incidents had been reported at the house in the past. He said a weapon was taken from the home, but would not release further details.

Dana McClure, who lives a few houses away from the Agnews, was surprised by the shooting.

"It's a nice neighborhood," she said. "You never see police come in here. It's usually a pretty quiet place."

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.