ShareThis Page
No decision about coroner’s inquest in death of Greensburg woman shot by police | TribLIVE.com
Westmoreland

No decision about coroner’s inquest in death of Greensburg woman shot by police

Renatta Signorini
887119_web1_gtr-greensburgshootfolo
WPXI via Adams family
Nina Adams

Westmoreland County Coroner Ken Bacha said Friday he will decide later whether to hold an inquest into the death of a Greensburg woman who was fatally shot by police this week.

After county detectives are finished investigating, Bacha said he will confer with District Attorney John Peck to decide if such a hearing is necessary in the death of Nina C. Adams, 47.

Since taking office in 2002, Bacha has held coroner’s inquests into police shooting deaths when circumstances warrant one. An inquest is a hearing during which testimony is taken to determine how a person died and, in cases involving police, whether the use of lethal force was justified or if homicide charges are warranted.

“I’ve done it on most of them, not all of them,” Bacha said.

On other occasions, an inquest wasn’t needed because the facts were “blatantly obvious,” he said.

Police said Adams was holding a gun when a Greensburg officer fatally shot her on her Grant Street porch Wednesday afternoon. Family members said she had mental health issues. Police said there is no video of the shooting.

Neighbors called 911 after hearing gunshots and seeing Adams shooting a handgun in the road. One round shattered the glass front door of a Harvey Avenue office building.

Four Greensburg officers arrived. One shot her with nonlethal beanbags, but she remained standing with the gun, investigators said. A second officer opened fire. Adams later died from gunshots to the torso and shoulder at Excela Health Westmoreland Hospital. Her death was ruled a homicide, which is a cause of death not a criminal charge.

The officer who pulled the trigger is not on patrol but working on paperwork, Capt. Robert Stafford said. Investigators declined to identify the officers involved. No one else was hurt.

The situation was an unusual one for Greensburg, Stafford said. It’s rare for any type of shooting in the city, involving police or otherwise.

“We haven’t had anything like this,” Stafford said.

There have been about a dozen fatal shootings by police in the county since 2002, Bacha said. He has held nine or 10 inquests, one of which involved a death that was not the result of police involvement. All of the deaths that did involve police were ruled justified homicides, Bacha said.

The most recent inquest was for Scott Murphy, 46, who was killed during a 17-hour standoff with police in Latrobe on July 19, 2013. A state trooper was wounded during a gun battle with the suspect. His death was ruled a justified homicide.

Family and neighbors described Adams as quiet, gentle and well-loved. An aunt said Adams, who earned a history degree from Seton Hill University in 1996, had mental health struggles.

The last time a person was fatally shot by a police officer in Greensburg was 10 years ago when a state police sharpshooter killed Joseph Briggs, 22, of Maryland, during a standoff. Briggs, a Seton Hill University student, had fired at least 42 shots on Feb. 15, 2009, at his roommates, police officers and cars and homes near his Concord Avenue apartment.

That shooting was ruled justified.

Renatta Signorini is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Renatta at 724-837-5374, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Westmoreland
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.