DNA links man to Leechburg robbery 2 years ago |
Valley News Dispatch

DNA links man to Leechburg robbery 2 years ago

Chuck Biedka

A Leechburg man allegedly matches DNA found at the scene of a robbery two years ago.

Police say DNA from the crime scene matches a DNA sample taken in February of Matthew Donald Ward, 23, of Second Street.

He is accused of wearing a wolf mask and black gloves and walking into the Sunoco along Market Street in Leechburg at about 4 a.m. on June 8, 2016.

Ward allegedly had a black handgun wrapped inside a white towel. Although, police say, he put the revolver into a gym bag, he left the towel behind the cash register during the robbery, Leechburg acting Officer in Charge Jason Schaeffer, said.

The robber took money and cartons of menthol cigarettes, Schaeffer wrote in his affidavit.

A state police report received in January states there was no blood on the towel but there was other trace material found by the lab.

Police next got a search warrant to get a DNA swab from Ward. In March, the state police lab said Ward’s court-ordered sample matched the trace materials on the towel.

Ward was formally charged Wednesday with robbery, theft, receiving stolen property, reckless endangerment, and terroristic threats.

He was in the Armstrong County Jail in lieu of $75,000 bond pending a preliminary hearing Wednesday before Leechburg District Judge James Andring.

Chuck Biedka is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Chuck at 724-226-4711, [email protected] or via Twitter @ChuckBiedka.

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.