Bond denied for man accused in Vandergrift shooting |
Valley News Dispatch

Bond denied for man accused in Vandergrift shooting

Chuck Biedka

A Leechburg man was arraigned Monday on charges that he shot a woman in the face before shooting himself in the head at a Vandergrift residence in May.

Police said Roy Edward Berry Jr., 49, was in a bedroom with a woman on May 5 when he fired a shot from a 9 mm handgun that went through the woman’s mouth before shooting himself, according to a criminal complaint filed against him.

The woman’s husband, who was in another room with their infant child at the time of the shooting, secured the weapon until police arrived, the complaint said.

Berry and the woman were taken to Forbes Hospital, Monroeville. The woman, whose tongue was partially severed and had holes in both cheeks, was undergoing speech therapy as of early June, the complaint said.

The complaint did not list a motive for the shooting.

After being released from medical care, Berry agreed to turn himself in at a district judge’s office to be arraigned, police said. He was arraigned Monday before District Judge Cheryl Peck Yakopec on two felony counts of aggravated assault and five counts of reckless endangerment.

Berry was ordered held without bond in the Westmoreland County Prison.

A preliminary hearing is scheduled for June 25.

Chuck Biedka is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Chuck at 724-226-4711, [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.