ShareThis Page
Appeals court upholds Konias’ sentence for killing partner in armored truck heist |

Appeals court upholds Konias’ sentence for killing partner in armored truck heist

| Friday, March 18, 2016 5:15 p.m

The Pennsylvania Superior Court upheld the life sentence for Ken Konias, convicted in 2014 of killing his partner in a Garda armored truck in February 2012 and stealing $2.3 million in cash they’d collected from local businesses.

Konias, 26, of Dravosburg left some money in hiding places for his friends and family before fleeing to an existence of strippers and drugs in a Florida flophouse.

He sought to overturn his life sentence for murder and 20 years for robbery because he’d been denied public funding for expert witnesses. He claimed a detective lacked the expertise to say there was no evidence Konias fought with fellow guard Michael Haines inside the armored car; and the verdict of first-degree murder wasn’t supported by the evidence.

The Superior Court opinion said Konias gave no proof that neither he nor his family could afford to pay for experts. The court upheld the detective’s testimony and ruled that the trial court properly interpreted the orderly interior of the truck, Haines’ tucked-in uniform and the gunshot wound to the back of his head as evidence that he hadn’t forced Konias to kill him in self-defense.

Categories: News
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.