Archive

Officers injured in Pittsburgh synagogue attack identified | TribLIVE.com
Allegheny

Officers injured in Pittsburgh synagogue attack identified

395045PTRShooting02102818
Nate Smallwood | Tribune-Review
A SWAT team member heads towards the scene of a mass shooting at a synagogue in Squirrel Hill on Oct. 27, 2018.

Two Pittsburgh police officers were still in the hospital Tuesday, recovering from gunshot wounds sustained during Saturday’s mass shooting in Squirrel Hill, officials said.

SWAT operator Tim Matson, who was shot more than a half-dozen times by alleged gunman Robert Bowers, and Zone 4 Officer Daniel Mead, who was one of the first officers on the scene, remained hospitalized, according to a statement from Public Safety spokesman Chris Togneri.

Mead was shot in the hand in a gun battle with Bowers as Bowers tried to leave the Tree of Life Congregation, police said.

Matson was listed in critical conditional at UPMC Presbyterian on Monday. Mead’s condition was stable.

SWAT operator Anthony Burke was shot in the hand on the third floor of the synagogue as officers tried to secure the scene. He was released from the hospital Sunday.

Zone 4 Officer Michael Smidga was treated and released Saturday. He was either grazed by a bullet or struck in the head by shrapnel, Togneri said.

The Pittsburgh Department of Public Safety had withheld the names of the officers until Tuesday.

Two additional officers, John Persin and Tyler Pashel, were not shot, but sustained injuries and were released. Persin suffered hearing-related issues. Pashel injured his knee.

“These officers and countless others acted heroically in running toward gunfire to save citizens and their fellow officers, as did many others from Pittsburgh Public Safety and neighboring law enforcement agencies,” Togneri said.

Megan Guza and Michael DiVittorio are Tribune-Review staff writers.

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.