Attorney claims police made false statement in search warrant for Pittsburgh Mills mall store | TribLIVE.com
Valley News Dispatch

Attorney claims police made false statement in search warrant for Pittsburgh Mills mall store

Madasyn Czebiniak
941828_web1_vnd-wang04-021219
Madasyn Czebiniak | Tribune-Review
The outside of the Shop off the Hanger store inside the Pittsburgh Mills Mall, which police allege was selling counterfeit items.
941828_web1_vnd-wang
Madasyn Czebiniak | Tribune-Review
A Pittsburgh Mills Mall directory that shows where the Shop off the Hanger store is located. Police allege the store was selling counterfeit items.

The attorney for a Pittsburgh Mills mall store owner charged with selling counterfeit merchandise has accused a former Frazer police officer of lying in a search warrant that ultimately lead to the criminal proceedings against his client.

Attorney Casey White again asked a judge to throw out the charge against Tommy Wang, 42, of Highland Park.

In a March 27 motion filed with Allegheny County Judge Randal B. Todd, White claimed the charge should be dismissed based on a false statement included in a search warrant for Wang’s store.

In the search warrant, former Frazer police Officer Lee Bartolicius said he consulted with Capt. Tom Crist of the state Fish and Boat Commission. According to the search warrant, Crist allegedly told Bartolicius, “It is common for a person engaged in illegal activity specifically of Asian descent to buy, sell, trade and breed in exotic, protected and endangered fish.”

White says he later was informed by Wayne Melnick, chief counsel of the Fish and Boat Commission, that Crist never said that.

Bartolicius now works for the Duquesne Police Department. He could not be reached for comment.

In an email exchange included in the motion, Melnick told White that Crist recalled having a conversation with local police but had no independent recollection that it was Bartolicius. Crist’s recollection was of a general request for assistance, and he didn’t recall the statements attributed to him by Bartolicius.

“The entire alleged conversation between the two law enforcement agencies never happened. The statement in the affidavit of probable cause is false and a lie,” White said. “This case should be dismissed because this offensive and material misstatement set in motion a series of events that led to the eventual arrest of Mr. Wang.”

The investigation into Wang, the Asian-American owner of the store, started after Frazer police were called to the store inside the mall, Shop Off the Hanger, for a report of an attempted burglary in February 2018, according to the criminal complaint filed in the case.

Bartolicius saw more than 100 items of what appeared to be unlicensed, counterfeit merchandise, the police report states. Investigators went to the store twice in March to look at, take pictures of and purchase counterfeit items, the complaint said.

A search warrant served March 15 allegedly turned up seven pallets containing almost 1,800 suspected counterfeit items, including glass coasters, flags, clocks, beer mugs and wine glasses containing Harley-Davidson, Pitt, Penn State, Pittsburgh Penguins and Pittsburgh Steelers logos.

White filed his first dismissal motion with Todd’s office last month, claiming the investigation into Wang was a “racially charged witch hunt.” He said police specifically targeted Wang because of his race and called the prosecution illegal.

Prosecutors in February contested White’s claims, saying police acted appropriately and without racial motivation in the case. They asked the judge not to dismiss the charge.

Mike Manko, spokesman for District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr., said he didn’t have a comment on White’s new dismissal motion.

Wang is set to appear for a nonjury trial April 10.

Madasyn Czebiniak is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Madasyn at 724-226-4702, [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.