William Rivera Pennsylvania Death Row

william rivera

William Rivera was sentenced to death by the State of Pennsylvania for a robbery murder. According to court documents William Rivera would carjack the victim who he would later murder. William Rivera would be arrested, convicted and sentenced to death

William Rivera 2022 Information

Parole Number: 156BS
Age: 45
Date of Birth: 05/14/1976
Race/Ethnicity: HISPANIC
Height: 5′ 05″
Gender: MALE
Citizenship: USA
Complexion: LIGHT
Current Location: PHOENIX

William Rivera More News

Here, the record establishes that on the evening of September 25, 1995, Mr. and Mrs. Kumok Kang closed their jewelry store located on North Front Street in Philadelphia.   The Kangs exited the store and crossed the street to their parked station wagon.   Mrs. Kang was carrying her pocketbook, a small paper bag containing a makeup kit, and an icebox that she used to carry her lunch.   Mr. Kang was carrying a manila envelope containing an x-ray.   William Rivera and his two accomplices, Robert Ortiz-Bonilla and Luis Centeno, observed the Kangs as they approached the station wagon.   Believing that the Kangs were transporting money in the manila envelope, the three men decided to rob the couple.

The Kangs traveled their usual route home, down Front Street towards Rising Sun Avenue.   Mr. Kang was driving the car, while Mrs. Kang sat on the passenger side.   Mr. Kang stopped at a red light at the intersection of Front Street and Rising Sun Avenue.   Suddenly, Mrs. Kang heard shattering glass and the sound of a man’s voice screaming at her husband to exit the car.   Mrs. Kang observed a gun poking through the shattered glass, aiming straight at her husband’s chest.

Mrs. Kang then heard two shots fired.   After being dragged out to the front of the car, Mr. Kang was shot two more times.   Eyewitnesses later identified William Rivera as the shooter.   Appellant then entered the driver’s side of the station wagon, while one accomplice, later identified as co-defendant Robert Ortiz-Bonilla, opened the passenger side door and yelled at Mrs. Kang to exit the car.   While the station wagon was in motion, Mrs. Kang exited the car and Ortiz-Bonilla grabbed her pocketbook and then jumped into the moving vehicle.   The vehicle then headed north on Rising Sun Avenue.   Later that evening, Mr. Kang was pronounced dead at Einstein Hospital.   He suffered four gunshot wounds in total, one to his hand and three to the chest.

William Rivera and Ortiz-Bonilla abandoned the station wagon in the Hill Creek Housing Projects and divided the $40 found in Mrs. Kang’s pocketbook.   The two men split up and met later that evening at the home of Doris Santos, Ortiz-Bonilla’s girlfriend at the time.   The two men entered the house and requested that she turn on the news.   The evening news covered the shooting, showing a picture of the station wagon and also reporting that Mr. Kang had died of the gunshot wounds.   After watching the news report, Appellant stated “that’s what we did.”   N.T., 1/30/98, at 67.

The police eventually questioned William Rivera about the shooting.   On August 10, 1996, Appellant waived his constitutional rights and gave a statement to the police.   In that statement, Appellant admitted taking part in the robbery and that he was the shooter that evening.   Appellant insisted, however, that the gun accidentally fired while he was struggling with Mr. Kang.

Several eyewitnesses testified at trial.   Derek Chapman testified that on the night in question he was with his fiancée, Lissa Woods, when he observed two men on the northbound side of Rising Sun Avenue running towards a station wagon.   Mr. Chapman heard two gunshots and then witnessed the victim, Mr. Kang, struggling with the shooter as the shooter dragged him out of the car.   After Mr. Kang put his hands up in the air, Mr. Chapman heard another two shots fired.   Mr. Chapman then saw a different man, later identified as Ortiz-Bonilla, pull a woman from the passenger side of the same car, and then drive off in the victims’ car with the shooter.   Lissa Woods, who had previously identified Appellant as the shooter from a photo array, also testified at trial about the events surrounding the shooting.5

This evidence was clearly sufficient to support Appellant’s conviction for first-degree murder.   Although Appellant claims that the shooting was an accident, the evidence clearly shows that the killing was committed with deliberation and with the specific intent to kill.   The medical examiner testified that the victim had four bullet wounds:  one to the right hand and three to the upper body.   Police Officer John Cannon, a firearms expert, testified that in order for the gun to be fired, the trigger had to be pulled each time.   N.T., 1/30/98, at 47.   This evidence is more than sufficient to find that Appellant acted with deliberation and with a specific intent to kill.   See Jones, 542 Pa. at 484, 668 A.2d at 500 (use of a deadly weapon on a vital part of the body is sufficient to establish the specific intent to kill).

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/pa-supreme-court/1121026.html

Cletus Rivera Pennsylvania Death Row

cletus rivera

Cletus Rivera was sentenced to death by the State of Pennsylvania for the murder of a police officer. According to court documents Cletus Rivera would shoot and kill the undercover officer in Reading. Cletus Rivera would be arrested, convicted and sentenced to death

Cletus Rivera 2022

Parole Number: 675FQ
Age: 39
Date of Birth: 02/10/1982
Race/Ethnicity: HISPANIC
Height: 5′ 08″
Gender: MALE
Citizenship: USA
Complexion: MEDIUM
Current Location: PHOENIX

Cletus Rivera More News

Tension filled the Berks County courtroom when jurors deciding Cletus C. Rivera’s fate returned to announce their verdict Thursday morning.

More than 30 sheriff’s deputies were in the courtroom, many in the aisle that separates the prosecution and defense.

Jurors apparently had reached a verdict, but Judge Stephen B. Lieberman told them to continue deliberating because there was an error on the verdict slip.

Jurors returned a few minutes later — about 11:30 — to announce their verdict for the Reading man they convicted last Friday of murdering Reading police Officer Scott A. Wertz on Aug. 6, 2006.

Lieberman asked for silence from the spectators who had packed the courtroom.

“If there are any delays, I will hold the people responsible in contempt of court and punish them appropriately,” Lieberman said.

The jury announced its decision that Rivera be sentenced to death by lethal injection.

Rivera lowered his head.

Wertz’s friends and relatives looked relieved.

The Northampton County jury was escorted from the courtroom and immediately boarded a bus to return home. Jurors were selected in Northampton County because of extensive publicity in Berks. They had been bused daily to Berks for the trial.

Jurors deliberated for more than 10 hours over two days before rendering their decision Thursday.

Later, Wertz’s widow, Tricia L., thanked Senior Deputy Attorney Generals K. Kenneth Brown and Jonnelle Eshbach, sheriff’s deputies and everyone else who helped with the case.

“I feel relief and happiness,” Wertz said. “Justice has been served. He died doing his job. After two years we can breathe a little easier. He was more than just a police officer. He was a father, a son and a brother.”

Wertz’s son Jared S., 14, said he was relieved the case was over and pleased with the outcome. His 9-year-old brother, Joshua A., said he was glad Rivera received the death sentence.

Rivera’s family declined comment.

During the formal sentencing that followed the jury’s verdict, Lieberman imposed an additional sentence of eight years and four months to 19 years in prison.

Lieberman said the community lost a fine public servant in Wertz, a nine-year veteran.

He noted that Rivera has led a life of crime since he was 13.

“Even though the commonwealth has spent thousands of dollars on your rehabilitation as a juvenile, you continue to commit crimes,” Lieberman said.

Rivera’s court-appointed attorneys, Jay M. Nigrini and Richard P. Reynolds, will appeal the conviction and sentence to the state Supreme Court.

Nigrini said it was clear the jury gave the life-or-death decision a great deal of consideration.

“Obviously, we’re disappointed for Cletus,” Nigrini said. “We respect the jury’s verdict. They thought long and hard before making their decision.”

Nigrini said he did not regret putting Rivera on the witness stand.

Rivera testified he intended to kill Wertz because he thought the officer was going to shoot him. He said he didn’t know Wertz was a policeman.

Wertz, 40, and Officer Malcolm F. Eddinger were part of an undercover auto-theft detail when they heard reports on the police radio of shots being fired in a parking lot at Eighth and Walnut streets near City Hall.

Eddinger said he and Wertz chased Rivera after they saw Rivera with a gun.

Eddinger said he saw Rivera shoot Wertz.

Witnesses said Wertz was shot in the chest and buttocks.

http://www2.readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=102295

Albert Reid Pennsylvania Death Row

albert reid pennsylvania

Albert Reid was sentenced to death by the State of Pennsylvania for the murder of a woman and her daughter. According to court documents Albert Reid would break into the home of his estranged wife and shoot and kill her and her daughter. Albert Reid would be arrested, convicted and sentenced to death

Albert Reid 2022 Information

Parole Number: 051CM
Age: 73
Date of Birth: 11/14/1948
Race/Ethnicity: BLACK
Height: 6′ 00″
Gender: MALE
Citizenship: JAMAICA
Complexion: DARK
Current Location: PHOENIX

Albert Reid More News

The evidence adduced at trial establishes that Appellant and Carla Reid had a tumultuous relationship.7  According to friends and acquaintances of both Appellant and Carla, Appellant was controlling of and abusive toward Carla.8  Several Pennsylvania State Police troopers from Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, testified that between 1990 and 1993, they each filed charges of terroristic threats, simple assault, or harassment against Appellant, though those charges were subsequently dropped upon Carla’s request.9  The Commonwealth also presented evidence that Carla had previously filed two Protection from Abuse (“PFA”) Petitions 10 against Appellant but later sought and obtained a dismissal of the Petitions.11  The evidence further showed, however, that in October 1996, Carla filed a third PFA Petition against Appellant and, unlike the previous PFA Petitions she had filed, Carla did not seek a dismissal of this last Petition.   Rather, on October 30, 1996, a final PFA order (“PFA order”) was entered, with Appellant’s consent, stating that Appellant could not have any contact with Carla or her children.   This order was in effect when Carla and Deidra were murdered.

The evidence presented at trial also established that Appellant had been charged with the felony offense of aggravated indecent assault, 18 Pa.C.S. § 3125, and the misdemeanor offense of indecent assault, id. § 3126, based on allegations by Deidra that Appellant had sexually assaulted her.   In August 1994, Carla brought Deidra to the Barracks in Chambersburg and the two met with Trooper Kenneth M. Stapchuck.   N.T., 10/6/98, at 172.   According to Trooper Stapchuck, Deidra told him that Appellant had sexually assaulted her.  Id. at 173.   Trooper Stapchuck informed Deidra that he would have to interview Appellant, and Deidra indicated that she wanted Carla to be present during the interview.   Id. at 173-74.   For more than a year, Trooper Stapchuck unsuccessfully attempted to schedule an interview with Carla and Appellant.  Id. at 173-74.   Finally, in December 1995, Carla advised Trooper Stapchuck that she did not want him to continue with the investigation because she believed that Deidra had fabricated the allegations.   Id. at 174-75.

On July 31, 1996, Carla and Deidra returned to the Barracks.   Id. at 179, 184-85.   While at the Barracks, Carla told Trooper Mark Grove that she wanted to file charges against Appellant again based on Deidra’s allegations in 1994.  Id.  According to Trooper Grove, Carla essentially told him that she had discontinued the charges in December 1995 because Appellant had stopped abusing Deidra after she spoke with Trooper Stapchuck.   Id.  Trooper Grove testified that Carla stated that she wanted to renew the charges initially made against Appellant in 1994 because Appellant had recently assaulted Deidra.   Id.  Therefore, based on the allegations initially made by Deidra in 1994, Trooper Grove filed charges of aggravated indecent assault and indecent assault against Appellant.   Id. at 186, 225.   Trooper Grove obtained a warrant for Appellant’s arrest and arrested Appellant, and that same evening, Appellant was arraigned on the charges.   Id. at 226.   Two days later, Appellant was released on $10,000.00 bail subject to the conditions that he would not contact Carla or Deidra and that he would participate in a Franklin County pre-release program.

On August 12, 1996, District Justice John Wayman held a preliminary hearing regarding the charges against Appellant at which Appellant, Carla, and Deidra were present.   Based on Deidra’s testimony, District Justice Wayman determined that there was sufficient evidence to proceed to trial, which was scheduled for November 1996.   Shortly before the scheduled trial, however, Appellant moved to continue the trial until January so that he could obtain money to hire an attorney.   The trial court granted Appellant’s request for a continuance and rescheduled the trial on the indecent assault charges for January 6, 1997.12

The evidence presented at trial further showed that following the preliminary hearing on the assault charges, Appellant not only made statements evincing his intent to kill Carla and Deidra, but also sought to purchase and eventually did purchase a gun.   Tyrone Kelly, who often worked with Appellant, testified that Appellant had told him about the indecent assault charges pending against him and stated that before he would let Carla obtain all of their marital property, he would wipe Carla and Deidra out.   N.T., 10/6/98, at 209. Mr. Kelly also testified that several times between October and November 1996, Appellant asked him if he would buy a gun to sell to Appellant, and he refused to do so.   Id.  Vonnie Trunbaugh, a friend of Appellant’s, testified that Appellant visited her in the middle of November 1996 and informed her of the indecent assault charges against him.   Id. at 197-98.   Ms. Turnbaugh said that Appellant explained that he was innocent of the charges and that “he would kill someone before he went back to jail.”  Id.

Anthony Hurd testified that in November 1996, Appellant approached him on the street in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, and inquired about obtaining a gun from him.   N.T., 10/8/98, at 499-500.   Mr. Hurd said that he told Appellant he would look into getting a gun for Appellant but he never actually got a gun for Appellant.   Id. at 500-03.   According to Mary Jones, however, in December 1996, Appellant asked her if she could get him a gun and she did in fact sell him a gun and six bullets.   N.T., 10/7/98, at 350-54.13  Ms. Jones stated that she did not know specifically what type of gun she sold to Appellant but after observing several different types of guns presented to her by the police, she thought that the gun she sold Appellant resembled a Davis Industries .380 caliber handgun.   N.T., 10/8/98, at 508-10.

The evidence presented at trial also established that although Appellant was not to contact Carla pursuant to the conditions of his bail and the PFA order obtained by Carla, he nevertheless continued to do so.   According to Carla’s friend Candy Williams, late one night in the middle of December 1996, Carla telephoned her crying.   N.T., 10/7/98, at 323.   Ms. Williams testified that Carla stated that Appellant had followed her from work to the local grocery store, assaulted her as she attempted to enter the store, and threatened to kill her.   Id. at 325-37.   Carla further told Ms. Williams that Appellant followed her home from the store and was parked in the driveway in front of her house.   Id. at 323-24, 328.   Brett Wagner testified that on December 21, 1996, he went to Carla’s home to deliver toys to her children and as he was entering the driveway, he saw a man sitting in a purple pick-up truck in front of the home.   Id. at 333-35.14  Mr. Wagner stated that when Carla opened the door to accept the toys from him, the man from the truck approached the house and stated, “Carla, we need to talk.”   Id. at 337-38.

Donnie Williams testified that one evening in late December 1996, he was working at the Washington House Bar as a bouncer and observed Appellant attempt to speak to Carla several times.   Id. at 294.   Similarly, Karen Peoples testified that on the evening of either December 22 or 23, 1996, she was sitting at a table with Carla at the Washington House bar and during that time she saw Appellant repeatedly approach Carla and talk to her.   Id. at 308-09.   Ms. Peoples stated that Carla became very upset after Appellant left and told her that Appellant had threatened to put her lights out if he saw her talking to another man.   Id. at 309-11.

On December 26, 1996, Carla worked from 2:50 p.m. until 11:20 p.m. at her job at South Mountain Restoration Center in Hamilton Township, Pennsylvania.   After getting off work, Carla stopped at Kel’s Place, a local bar in Chambersburg.   Ruby Murray, Carla’s friend, testified that when Carla walked into the bar, she appeared distraught.   N.T., 10/7/98, at 439-40.   According to Ms. Murray, Carla said that Appellant had followed her to the bar and had told her that he was going to shoot her in the head and that she would not live to see another night.   Id.  Ms. Murray testified that she advised Carla to leave the bar with her and her friends and call the police, but Carla insisted on picking up her children from the babysitter’s house.   Id. at 440-42.   When Ms. Murray left the bar, she observed Appellant’s truck parked outside the bar.   Id. at 443-45.   Marlena Linda George Campbell, another friend of Carla’s, also testified that she saw Appellant sitting in his truck before she entered Kel’s Place at approximately 11:45 p.m. on December 26 and again when she left the bar shortly thereafter.   Id. at 463-67, 471-72.15

Carla subsequently left Kel’s Place and picked up her six children 16 at the babysitter’s house in Chambersburg at approximately 12:30 a.m. on December 27.   Id. at 477-78.   After assembling her children in her minivan, Carla drove to her home in Hamilton Township.   N.T., 10/6/98, at 157-58.   Carla’s oldest son, Jonathon, testified that on the ride home his mother appeared nervous and asked him to look out the back window of the minivan to see if Appellant was following them.   Id. at 159.   When they arrived home, Carla and her children prepared for bed and went to sleep.   Id.17

Sometime during the early morning hours of December 27, Carla and Deidra each suffered a single fatal gunshot wound to the head while in their beds.18  Carla was sleeping in a bed with her two sons, Jeremy and Lorrance.   Jeremy and Lorrance did not wake when Carla and Deidra were shot, but sometime afterwards Lorrance woke up Jeremy and said he wanted to talk to Deidra.   N.T., 10/5/98, at 130, 137.   Jeremy and Lorrance walked to Deidra’s room and when Jeremy attempted to wake Deidra, he got blood on his hands.   Id. at 130-31, 137.   Jeremy and Lorrance returned to their mother’s room and discovered that their mother was also bleeding.   Id. 131-32.

Jeremy and Lorrance went downstairs to wake up their older brother, Jonathon.  Id. at 132.   Jeremy woke up Jonathon and told him that his mother and sister were dead, but Jonathon thought that his brother was merely having a nightmare and told him to go back to bed.   Id. at 132, 137;  N.T, 10/6/98, at 162.19  Jeremy and Lorrance subsequently fell asleep downstairs.   Id. at 133-34.   At approximately 8:30 a.m. on December 27, Jonathon woke up and discovered that both Deidra and Carla were bleeding, cold, and immobile.   N.T., 10/6/98, at 163-64.   Jonathon attempted to call 911 but the telephone was dead.   Id. at 165.   Consequently, Jonathon woke up his brothers, Joseph and Jeremy, and told them to go to their neighbors’ homes to call the police, which they did.

The police arrived at the crime scene at 8:48 a.m. and initiated an investigation.   The police found a bullet of .380 auto caliber near Carla’s body and a bullet of the same caliber was subsequently recovered from Deidra’s body.20  They further learned that both a back door to the house leading into the basement and a sliding glass door that led to a porch in the back of the house were unlocked.   N.T., 10/5/98, at 56-57, 81, 90-91.21  In walking around the outside of the house, the police discovered that the telephone wire and the cable television wire leading into Carla’s house had been cut.   N.T., 10/5/98, at 65-66, 85-86, 112.   On the left side of the house near where the cable wire had been cut, the police observed a footprint in some bark mulch.   Id. at 112.22  The police additionally noticed that a dotted impression had been left on the PVC utility pipe outside of the house.   Id. at 57.

While the police were investigating the crime scene, Appellant appeared and agreed to go to the Barracks and speak with Troopers H. Wayne Sheppard and Anthony Manetta.   N.T., 10/8/98, at 513.   At the Barracks, Appellant told the troopers that he was in his room at the Rose Lawn Motel from 8:30 p.m. the previous evening until 9:00 a.m. that morning.   Id. at 514-15.   He further stated that he had not been near Carla’s home the previous evening and that he had never owned or even shot a gun.   Id. at 522.   During the interview, Trooper Sheppard thought he saw blood on Appellant’s jacket and therefore, asked him if he would consent to an analysis of the jacket.   Id. at 516.   Appellant agreed to allow the troopers to take his jacket as well as his boots and hat.   Id.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/pa-supreme-court/1382911.html

Michael Pruitt Pennsylvania Death Row

michael pruitt pennsylvania

Michael Pruitt was sentenced to death by the State of Pennsylvania for the sexual assault and murder of a woman. According to court documents Michael Pruitt forced his way into the victims home where he would sexually assault and murder her. Michael Pruitt would be arrested, convicted and sentenced to death

Michael Pruitt 2022 Information

Parole Number: 2731S
Age: 57
Date of Birth: 04/12/1964
Race/Ethnicity: BLACK
Height: 5′ 07″
Gender: MALE
Citizenship: USA
Complexion: MEDIUM
Current Location: PHOENIX

Michael Pruitt More News

A man convicted more than a decade ago for the brutal killing of a Sunday school teacher in Reading has again been spared his punishment.

Michael Pruitt was set to be executed on December, but a federal judge has issued a stay, postponing the penalty from being carried out.

Pruitt, now 53, was convicted in 2005 of killing Greta Gougler three years earlier. The 69-year-old Sunday school teacher was robbed, raped, and strangled inside her home on North Ninth Street.

Gary Gougler, the victim’s nephew, said he’s angered by the fact that his aunt’s killer continues to sit in prison because of a moratorium on the death penalty signed by Gov. Tom Wolf in 2015.

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania also granted Pruitt a stay of execution.

“Everybody loved her, and our family gotta go through this stuff,” Gary told 69 News.

Pruitt, who has been on death row since 2005, was previously scheduled to die in 2009, but that execution was also stayed by the court.

“I just want him gone. Then, he can go to the other side, where he can face the maker. He can face God. He’ll get punished for what he did,” Gary said.

Gary is angry at Wolf. He said the governor is standing in the way of his family’s peace of mind.

“All these years, putting a family through [this]. Now, my aunts are in their 80s. They don’t have no more fight left. It’s up to me and my daughters,” added Gary.

https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/berks/victims-family-upset-that-killers-execution-postponed/article_635333f5-40d0-5fdd-a5cf-825044c0d374.html

Donyell Paddy Pennsylvania Death Row

Donyell Paddy

Donyell Paddy was sentenced to death by the State of Pennsylvania for a double murder. According to court documents Donyell Paddy would shoot and kill two people. While being held for trial Donyell Paddy paid a number of people to prevent a witness from testifying against him. Donyell Paddy was ultimately convicted and sentenced to death.

Donyell Paddy 2022 Information

Parole Number: 822BY
Age: 53
Date of Birth: 06/20/1968
Race/Ethnicity: BLACK
Height: 5′ 09″
Gender: MALE
Citizenship: USA
Complexion: DARK
Current Location: PHOENIX

Donyell Paddy More News

According to the evidence offered at trial, the events leading up to Lashawn’s murder began on January 15, 1991, when two men were shot to death as they played basketball at the Panati Playground at 22nd and Lippincott Streets in Philadelphia.   Lashawn, standing across the street, witnessed the shootings.   Although initially reluctant to cooperate with the police, Lashawn eventually gave a formal statement identifying Paddy as one of the two men who had done the shooting.   Lashawn knew Paddy from her neighborhood and also identified him in a photo array.   Explaining her initial unwillingness to identify Paddy as the shooter, Lashawn asserted in her statement to the police, given on May 15, 1991, that “I knew it was him from the beginning, but I was scared.   I still am.”   An arrest warrant was issued for Paddy on June 11, 1991, and he turned himself in to the police several weeks later.

Lashawn was issued a subpoena to testify at Paddy’s trial, scheduled to begin on September 14, 1992.   On that date, trial was continued until Monday, September 21, at the request of the defense, and a new subpoena was issued for Lashawn.   Lashawn’s statement, which had been the subject of a protective order, was disclosed to the defense several days later.   When a detective contacted Lashawn over the weekend to remind her of the upcoming trial, Lashawn informed him that she would not attend, adding, “You can tell Judge O’Keefe he can kiss my ass.”   On September 21, Lashawn failed to appear.   As jury selection proceeded, the police searched unsuccessfully for her.   On September 24, with jury selection completed and Lashawn still at large, the Commonwealth was forced to nolle pros the charges against Paddy.

After the police finally located Lashawn in Philadelphia on November 2, 1992, they learned that friends of Paddy, including Lashawn’s cousin, Freddy Murphy, and a man known as Sadeeq, had, at Paddy’s behest, taken Lashawn to a Super 8 Motel in College Park, Maryland, and promised her $5,000.   Numerous telephone calls were made from their room at the motel to persons in Philadelphia, including Stephen Blount, another of Paddy’s friends.   Blount attended the aborted trial and apparently kept those in Maryland abreast of developments, as Lashawn and her companions returned to Philadelphia immediately after the charges had been nolle prossed.   Lashawn explained to the police that she had left the state because she was afraid that Paddy or his friends would harm her or her family if she testified against him.   Nevertheless, she again agreed to testify, the charges against Paddy were reinstated, and trial was scheduled to begin on November 5.

By this time, however, Paddy could not be found.   On the basis of information suggesting that Paddy had fled to Maryland, a federal fugitive warrant was issued charging him with flight to avoid prosecution, and the joint fugitive task force of the Philadelphia police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted an intensive manhunt.   Although Paddy could not be located, it became apparent that he had not left Philadelphia.   At one point investigators spotted Paddy driving a white 1988 Ford Mustang, which was later determined to have been titled to a fictitious name.   Freddy Murphy, Lashawn’s cousin, encountered Paddy on the street, where Paddy told him that Lashawn had been “running her f—— mouth” about him and “saying things she shouldn’t say.”   Paddy informed Murphy that someone should warn Lashawn “before somebody rides up on her and puts some holes in her.”   In a later encounter, Paddy asked Murphy if he had conveyed a warning to Lashawn;  Murphy admitted that he had not.   On April 26, 1993, while in the Trism Trail Bar, Paddy told his cousin, Shawn Roussaw, that if Lashawn would not “cooperate,” she “would have to go.”   On that occasion, according to Roussaw, Paddy was disguised as a woman, wearing a long wig, a dress, and a beige coat.

Two days later, on Wednesday, April 28, 1993, Roussaw was ingesting cocaine at a playground at 22nd and Lippincott Streets,1 less than a block from the home of Lashawn’s cousin, Sharon Whaley, when he noticed a blue, two-door automobile go by.   Although he did not recognize the driver of the car, Roussaw, who had known Paddy all his life, recognized him as the passenger, wearing a wig, sunglasses, and tan overcoat.   As the car went past the playground, Paddy looked at Roussaw and smiled.   The car matched the description of a vehicle that Sharon Whaley had seen parked near her home the previous two days.   On both occasions, she had recognized the driver as a man she had dated named Kevin Green;  the passenger was, she thought, a woman with long hair, wearing a baseball cap.

Lashawn had left her mother’s home earlier that day to visit Sharon.   As she was leaving, Lashawn was heard by her sister Rochelle telling her mother “that if anything happened to her, she loved her.”   As the blue car was driven past Roussaw and toward Sharon’s home, Lashawn and several relatives, including her sister Tara and Sharon, were standing outside the house.   The car stopped a short distance away, and, as the driver of the car shouted, “Get the f— out, do it, do it,” Paddy-described by witnesses as wearing a wig, dress, coat, baseball cap, and dark glasses, and holding a paper towel over his face from chin to nose-got out of the car, aimed a handgun at Lashawn, and fired repeatedly.   One shot narrowly missed Tara;  six other shots, including one that lodged just beneath the eye, struck and fatally injured Lashawn.

Although Paddy and his accomplice fled the scene of the shooting, the blue, two-door car was found several blocks away.   Both Sharon and Tara identified the car as the one from which the shooter had emerged.   A thumbprint and palm print on the car’s exterior were determined to be Paddy’s, and crime-scene personnel found, on the passenger side of the vehicle, four long strands of synthetic fiber of the type used to make wigs.   Paddy was arrested on May 14, 1993, and charged with Lashawn’s murder.

In April of 1995, Paddy went to trial on the charges arising from both the Panati Playground shootings and Lashawn’s murder.   Prior to trial, the trial court (Savitt, J.), in response to defense counsel’s motion in limine, ruled that Lashawn’s statement to the police identifying Paddy as the perpetrator of the Panati Playground homicides would be admitted, as redacted, for the sole purpose of showing that Lashawn was killed because she had witnessed a crime.   The trial court specifically stated that Lashawn’s statements concerning threats made to her were inadmissible, being hearsay not within any exception.   Alibi witnesses testified on Paddy’s behalf, as did three witnesses-Melvin Robinson, Zachary Kemp, and Kim Collins-who refuted various aspects of Shawn Roussaw’s testimony.   The proceeding ended in a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a verdict.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/pa-supreme-court/1451512.html