ShareThis Page
News

No verdict yet in Orie case

| Friday, March 23, 2012

The Allegheny County jury deciding the fate of state Sen. Jane Orie deliberated 12 hours today ?without reaching a verdict and will continue their discussions Saturday.

The jury of five men and seven women has been sequestered since they started deliberations at 3 p.m. Thursday, and the panel has deliberated for 17 hours over two days.

Orie, 50, a McCandless Republican, is facing 24 charges stemming from two criminal cases. She is accused of directing her state-paid staff to do political work for herself and her sister, state Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin, and of introducing forged documents that led to a mistrial last March during her first trial.

The jury today asked three questions and took two breaks outside. They took a two-hour break to eat dinner at Damon`s in the U.S. Steel Tower before resuming deliberations at 9:30 p.m. They ended deliberations at 10:45.

The jury`s questions were related to accusations that Orie violated the state election code. The jury asked whether count 15 of Orie`s second case stemmed from allegations that Orie did not sign her 2006 campaign finance reports or have them notarized. Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey A. Manning told them to reread their jury instructions.

The second question asked whether count 16 of the second case pertains to allegations that an in-kind contribution to Orie was not reported in 2006. Manning answered yes. The third question pertained to an exhibit the jurors said they could not find. The judge said the court would provide a copy.

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.

click me