Archive

ShareThis Page
Monroeville man acquitted of all charges in attempted police murder case | TribLIVE.com
Westmoreland

Monroeville man acquitted of all charges in attempted police murder case

Friends and family of a Monroeville man embraced and were deciding how to celebrate Friday night minutes after a Westmoreland County jury acquitted him of all charges in connection with a police shooting three years ago in Bell.

Joshua Jesse, 44, was found not guilty of attempted murder, aggravated assault and four counts of assault of law enforcement officials after a police chase ended in a gun battle in a grassy field near the Kiski River on Sept. 17, 2014.

“I am thankful for the verdict and thankful no one was hurt except for me. It has been a long road for us,” Jesse said outside of the courtroom.

“This was never meant to happen,” he said. “It was just a bad day.”

During the three-day trial, Westmoreland County prosecutors contended Jesse tried to kill police at the conclusion of the 22-mile chase, which started in Murrysville and ended in Bell.

Jesse was shot 10 times by police after a gun he held fired one time and did not strike any of the four officers who had cornered him.

Westmoreland County District Attorney John Peck declined to comment about the verdict. The jury deliberated for about five hours.

But during closing arguments, Peck said Jesse was trying to force police to shoot him.

“Nothing stopped him from killing himself, but he didn’t have the guts to do it,” Peck said, “so he did the next best thing: he (attempted) ‘suicide by cop.’

“You can’t just shoot a police officer and expect nothing to happen because you were having a bad day.”

Jesse was sought by police under suspicion that he needed an involuntary mental health commitment.

Police found him at a Murrysville gas station and followed him for more than 20 miles before he drove down a dead-end road that abutted the river.

Witnesses said Jesse got out of his pickup with a gun at his side, threatened a police officer and fired one shot after being struck with a Taser.

The first four police officers on the scene fired 26 rounds, hitting Jesse 10 times.

The defense contended that Jesse was a troubled man who never intended violence that day but found himself dealing with the aftermath of a fight with his wife and potentially suicidal feelings.

Jesse did not testify during the trial.

His wife, Janeen Jesse, told jurors that she feared for his life after their argument and called police to help.

She testified she spoke with her husband via cell phone during the police chase.

“I pleaded with him to just pull over, to stop,” she testified.

Defense attorney Jeff Monzo argued that Joshua Jesse, who had no prior criminal record and a stellar reputation in the community, did not intend to hurt anyone.

Monzo suggested that Jesse didn’t purposely fire his gun and that his arm involuntary rose and the gun discharged after he was struck with the Taser.

“A verdict for Josh is not a verdict against the police officers,” Monzo said. “He didn’t intend to hurt anyone, and he didn’t hurt anyone.”

Rich Cholodofsky is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-830-6293 or [email protected].


vndJoshuaJesse101814
Courtesy of Westmoreland County Prison
Joshua Jesse
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.