Arnold woman who missed court date related to New Kensington cop killing turns herself in |
Valley News Dispatch

Arnold woman who missed court date related to New Kensington cop killing turns herself in

Rich Cholodofsky
Tribune-Review file photo
Lisa Harrington

It turns out, an Arnold woman likely wasn’t on the lam when she failed to appear in court for a hearing earlier this week.

She just didn’t know when she was supposed to be in court.

Lisa Harrington, 33, told a judge she believed her hearing on Monday had been scheduled for another day, said Westmoreland County Assistant District Attorney Jim Lazar.

Harrington is awaiting trial on charges she hindered police in their efforts to apprehend Rahmael Sal Holt, the Harrison man charged with killing New Kensington police Officer Brian Shaw on Nov. 17, 2017.

Westmoreland County Common Pleas Court Judge Rita Hathaway issued a bench warrant for Harrington after she failed to appear in court for a hearing to schedule her upcoming trial.

The judge initially said Harrington would be detained and held in jail until her trial. According to court records, though, Hathaway on Tuesday decided to allow Harrington to remain free on $75,000 bond.

Lazar said Harrington is almost nine months pregnant.

Harrington’s trial is scheduled to begin in June.

Holt, 30, of Harrison, was is awaiting trial on a first-degree murder charge in the death of Shaw, who police said was gunned down following a traffic stop in New Kensington.

Holt was arrested after a four-day manhunt.

Investigators contend Harrington and other friends and family members lied to police about Holt’s whereabouts during the search.

Westmoreland County prosecutors said they will seek the death penalty against Holt, whose trial is scheduled to begin in August.

Rich Cholodofsky is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Rich at 724-830-6293, [email protected] or via Twitter .

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.