Archive

ShareThis Page
Jeannette teacher’s admission to sex with student can be used at trial, judge rules | TribLIVE.com
Westmoreland

Jeannette teacher’s admission to sex with student can be used at trial, judge rules

A confession from a former Jeannette High School teacher charged with having sex with a student can be used against her at an upcoming trial, a Westmoreland County judge ruled Wednesday.

Common Pleas Court Judge Tim Krieger in a seven-page opinion determined that statements made by Maria Chappell as she was questioned by school administrators about her relationship with the 16-year-old male in 2016 can be presented to a jury.

Police said Chappell, 40, of Mt. Pleasant, had sexual encounters with the teen in her classroom and in a local motel and that she confessed when confronted by the school’s principal. She is charged with four felony counts including having sexual contact with a student.

Krieger ruled that Chappell knew her participation in the questioning, conducted in Principal Patricia Rozycki’s office in the presence of a union representative, was voluntary and that she was not in police custody at the time.

During a pretrial hearing last month, Chappell’s attorney, Jeff Monzo, argued that her confession was illegally obtained and that school officials acted in a law enforcement capacity during the questioning.

Chappell’s trial has not been scheduled.

Rich Cholodofsky is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-830-6293 or rcholodofsky@tribweb.com.


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.