Police: Fight outside Downtown McDonald’s left man paralyzed | TribLIVE.com

Police: Fight outside Downtown McDonald’s left man paralyzed

Tom Davidson

A man who was in a fight Monday night at the Wood Street McDonald’s restaurant is paralyzed with a spinal cord injury, according to the criminal complaint filed against a woman charged with assaulting him. He remains in the intensive care unit of Allegheny General Hospital.

The fight started shortly after 10 p.m., when the man, identified in the complaint as Marc Conn, and a woman he was with got into an argument with a man who was sitting behind them.

. A McDonald’s employee, Roneese Davis, 25, of Pittsburgh’s Perry North neighborhood, confronted Conn who was with the woman. Davis and another McDonald’s employee, who hasn’t been charged, started fighting with the couple.

It wasn’t clear from the complaint if Davis was working at the time of the fight.

The fight spilled outside the restaurant. Video footage from the restaurant, city cameras and Facebook video from a bystander showed Davis punching Conn once in the back of the head, knocking him out, according to the criminal complaint.

Davis has been charged with aggravated assault and is in police custody.

Police are asking any witnesses to call detectives at 412-255-2827.

An employee at the McDonald’s said workers are not allowed to comment on the incident.

Tom Davidson is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tom at 724-226-4715, [email protected] or via Twitter .

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.