Michael Rosfeld’s attorney to seek outside jury in Antwon Rose case |

Michael Rosfeld’s attorney to seek outside jury in Antwon Rose case

The defense attorney for the East Pittsburgh police officer charged in the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager said Tuesday he plans to seek approval to bring in a jury from a different county for the homicide case.

A trial is scheduled for Feb. 26.

Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Anthony Mariani gave defense attorney Patrick Thomassey until Sept. 25 to file the motion for a change of venire, but Thomassey said after Tuesday’s pre-trial conference that he’ll have the motion filed in a matter of days.

His client, Michael Rosfeld, is charged with one count of homicide in the June 19 fatal shooting of Antwon Rose II as he ran from a felony traffic stop. The shooting sparked weeks of protests across Allegheny County.

“There’s been so much consternation in this city,” Thomassey said. “We’ve had tie-ups of traffic, there have been people attacked, people pulled out of cars — it’s gotten a lot of attention. I mean, they picketed a judge’s home, and people in this county, I think, would be afraid to sit on a jury in this case.”

Thomassey also filed a motion Tuesday asking Mariani to recuse himself in light of comments he made in the aftermath of the shooting. Mariani appears in a regular segment on PCNC’s NightTalk called “Sidebar with Judge Mariani.”

In the segment, which aired June 21, Mariani “used words such as ‘Maybe he shot this man out of frustration’ and ‘Maybe the training wasn’t adequate,’” Thomassey said.

Thomassey questioned whether Mariani could remain impartial after having made those statements. Assistant District Attorney Daniel Fitzsimmons said he had no position on the motion.

Mariani said he has no plans to step aside. If he had thought he should once he found out the case had been assigned to him, “I’d have done so already,” he said.

The judge had indicated early in the hearing that he could change his mind if it turned out that defense counsel could immediately appeal the decision, as he said he did not want to cause any delay in the trial’s proceedings.

Mariani gave Thomassey until next week to decide whether he wants to revisit the motion to recuse with supporting evidence. If he does, that hearing will take place Sept. 21.

“It was my ethical obligation to file a motion because a judge made comments on a case that’s before him. He denied that motion, so you’ve just got to move on,” Thomassey said after the hearing. “We might revisit (the motion), we may not.”

Rosfeld, 30, was charged June 27. He waived his right to a formal arraignment Aug. 22 and did not appear in court on that date. Rosfeld is free on electronic monitoring after posting $250,000 unsecured bond in the hours after his arrest.

Rose was a passenger in a car suspected in a drive-by shooting minutes earlier on June 19 in nearby North Braddock. Police say the car had gunshot damage to its rear window, likely from the earlier shooting. As Rosfeld ordered the jitney driver to the ground, Rose and backseat passenger Zaijuan Hester fled on foot, authorities said.

Witnesses and District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. contend that Rose got out of the passenger seat, briefly showed his hands and then turned and ran. Rosfeld shot Rose three times, the last being the fatal shot, officials said.

The Rose family filed a wrongful death lawsuit this month contending that Rosfeld used excessive and deadly force against the teenager when he should have waited for backup.

Megan Guza is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Megan at 412-380-8519, [email protected] or via Twitter @meganguzaTrib.

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.