ShareThis Page

Pittsburgh police officer charged with lying to feds

Megan Guza
| Thursday, Nov. 29, 2018, 5:18 p.m.

A Pittsburgh police officer faces federal charges alleging he lied to the FBI during a bank robbery investigation this year, according to court records unsealed Thursday.

Officer Antoine Cain, 49, was charged in U.S. District Court on Tuesday with two counts of making false statements to government agents, according to the information filed.

A public safety spokesman said the bureau is aware of the charges, and Cain has been placed on unpaid suspension. A plea deal between the government and Cain has been finalized, he said.

City records show Cain has been a member of the department since 1994. As of June, he was assigned to Zone 6 with a salary of $66,726.

FBI agents were investigating an armed bank robbery at the Citizens Bank on Foster Avenue near the Ingram-Pittsburgh border on Jan. 8, court records show.

During the investigation, Cain in a July 27 interview “denied any knowledge of the identity of the individual” who robbed the bank, a complaint said.

In reality, not only did Cain know who the suspect was, but the suspect had actually told Cain that he was responsible for the robbery, the complaint said.

Cain told the same lie July 31, according to the information.

A federal grand jury this week accused Brent Richards, 32, of Ingram of brandishing a firearm and robbing the Citizens Bank branch of $10,003, U.S. Attorney Scott W. Brady said.

His mother, Melissa Kane, 47, of Pittsburgh’s Beechview neighborhood was charged with being an accessory after the fact for trying to prevent her son from getting arrested, federal prosecutors said.

Staff writer Bob Bauder contributed. Megan Guza is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Megan at 412-380-8519, or via Twitter @meganguzaTrib.

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.

click me