ShareThis Page

Fire that critically burned man still being probed

| Thursday, May 10, 2012, 1:17 a.m.

Authorities hadn't ruled as of Wednesday on the cause of a fire that put a Penn Township man in a Pittsburgh burn unit.

Township police Chief Michael Mastroianni said Wednesday that a state police fire marshal and a township fire investigator returned this week to 397 Meadowbrook Road, Level Green, to try to figure out the cause.

"They're not sure at this point," he said. "They have more checking to do."

Ed Uherek, 46, was in critical condition yesterday at Mercy Hospital of Pittsburgh, Uptown, a spokeswoman said.

He was flown to Mercy after he was rescued by four firefighters shortly after the fire began at about 7 p.m. Sunday.

Mastroianni and Level Green fire Chief Buss Barkefelt said fire officials hope to speak with Uherek as part of the probe into the fire's origins.

"Maybe he can shed some light on it. Maybe he can't," Barkefelt said.

At this point, the cause of the fire is considered to be undetermined, he added.

Barkefelt identified Tom Grills, Tom Plecenik, Bill Bozzick and Brian Whitney as the four firefighters who found Uherek in a laundry room and took him to other waiting firefighters, who then took him to medical personnel so emergency treatment could begin.

Police said the fire appeared to have started in the downstairs game room where Uherek had been.

"We still don't think it was anything suspicious, certainly nothing criminal," Mastroianni said.

Uherek's father and a woman identified only as "Debbie" also were in the home when the fire occurred.

The father suffered burns, too.

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.

click me