Attorney seeks more time to file amended appeal for Loyalhanna man convicted in 2009 shooting deaths |

Attorney seeks more time to file amended appeal for Loyalhanna man convicted in 2009 shooting deaths

Rich Cholodofsky

The lawyer for a Loyalhanna man on death row for killing his mother, sister and aunt a decade ago wants more time to file an amended appeal.

Defense attorney Brian Aston said he needs two months to contact and interview witnesses as well as review more than 20,000 pages of records and documents in preparation for a potential hearing challenging the first-degree murder convictions and death sentence imposed on Kevin Murphy by a Westmoreland County jury.

Murphy, 58, was sentenced to death in 2013 after he was convicted of the April 23, 2009, shooting deaths of his mother, Doris Murphy, 69; sister Kris Murphy, 43; and aunt Edith Tietge, 81, at Ferguson Glass in Loyalhanna Township.

The women worked at the family business, which Kevin Murphy owned. Police said he used a .22-caliber revolver to shoot each of the women in the head because they disapproved of his romantic relationship with a married woman and didn’t want her to live at the family home near Saltsburg.

Aston was appointed in 2016 to augment the appeal filed earlier that year by Murphy, who contends he received an inadequate defense from his trial lawyers.

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

Categories: Local | Westmoreland
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.