Jeannette murder trial date set; Attorney says accused has alibi |

Jeannette murder trial date set; Attorney says accused has alibi

Rich Cholodofsky

An Allegheny County man charged with murder in a fatal shooting two years ago in Jeannette was ruled competent to stand trial.

Westmoreland County Common Pleas Court Judge Meagan Bilik-DeFazio said Monday a mental health examination of Darrelle Tolbert-McGhee found that he was able to assist his defense and cleared him of any psychiatric issues that could further delayed his trial.

Tolbert-McGhee, 30, of Penn Hills, is charged with first-degree murder for the April 13, 2017, shooting death of 32-year-old Michael Wilson, who police said was gunned down in front of the Dollar General store on Clay Avenue. Prosecutors have said the shooting was recorded on surveillance cameras and witnesses identified Tolbert-McGhee as the shooter.

The judge scheduled the trial to begin Jan. 6.

Defense attorney Tim Dawson said Tolbert-McGhee has an alibi for the time of the shooting. In a previous court hearing, Tolbert-McGhee suggested his twin brother might have been Wilson’s killer.

“He was in Florida at the time of the shooting. He had an identical twin brother who was involved with the drug trade and who had a bad relationship with the victim,” Dawson said.

Twin brother Dwayne Lamar Tolbert-McGhee, 29, was shot and killed May 4, 2018, in Wilkinsburg. At the time of his death he was awaiting trial on drug posession charges in Westmoreland County.

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.