Police: Homeowners stop would-be burglar, hold him at gunpoint | TribLIVE.com
Valley News Dispatch

Police: Homeowners stop would-be burglar, hold him at gunpoint

Madasyn Lee

A Harrison couple didn’t wait for township police to arrive to deal with an attempted burglary at their home Saturday night, according to a criminal complaint.

Police said one of the homeowners held the suspect at gunpoint until officers arrived.

Casey Hill, 30, of Buffalo Township, is charged with burglary, disorderly conduct and public drunkenness in connection with an incident at 10:30 p.m. Saturday at a Pine Street duplex, court records showed.

The homeowners, a man and a woman, told police Hill walked up the porch steps and opened the front door, according to the complaint. The woman said she tried to push Hill out, while the male homeowner grabbed a gun, ordered Hill to the ground and held the suspect at gunpoint in the front yard until police arrived, the complaint said.

Hill told responding officers that he had been trying to get some marijuana. Police said he appeared to be heavily intoxicated and had to be helped to a police car because he had trouble keeping his balance.

The homeowners said another man driving a greenish-colored Jeep Cherokee sped off during the incident, and they believe that man was with Hill.

Hill was released on a nonmonetary bond after being arraigned Sunday. Court records don’t list an attorney for him.

A preliminary hearing is set for Oct. 9.

Madasyn Lee is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Madasyn at [email protected], 724-226-4702 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.