Attorneys protest date of trial in Mt. Oliver death |

Attorneys protest date of trial in Mt. Oliver death

Attorneys for Mt. Oliver police and a Pittsburgh officer have appealed a federal judge’s refusal to delay a trial in a civil rights lawsuit stemming from the suffocation death of an Altoona man.

U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab has set the trial for Dec. 8 in the death of Charles A. Dixon Sr., 43, who was smothered during his arrest at the Mt. Oliver Volunteer Fire Hall on Dec. 22.

The office of Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. is reviewing the evidence to determine if charges should be filed against police. Mike Manko, Zappala’s spokesman, said there was “no indication the review would be completed by the time the federal trial is scheduled to start.”

The defense attorneys contend that if the officers give depositions in the civil case, it could constitute a waiver of their Fifth Amendment right to remain silent in any criminal case.

Dr. Cyril H. Wecht, the county coroner, has ruled that Dixon’s death was a homicide and that police should be charged, but he didn’t determine which ones.

Wecht urged Zappala to find out which officers piled onto Dixon and to prosecute those responsible.

Attorney Paul Krepps, who represents six Mt. Oliver police officers, Chief Frank Mosesso, Mayor John Smith and the borough, and attorney Bryan Campbell, counsel for Pittsburgh police Officer Kevin Walter, filed the appeal to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after Schwab denied their request to place the lawsuit on inactive status.

Attorney J. Kerrington Lewis, counsel for Dixon’s son, Charles A. Dixon Jr., who is administrator of his estate, said he is reviewing whether to file a motion to quash the appeal.

He said Mt. Oliver officers Matthew Juzwick, Michael DeLuca, Matthew Abel, Ronald Lacher, Mark Manno and Kevin Cummings refused to give depositions earlier this week.

Kerrington said Pittsburgh officers Paul Abel, brother of Matthew Abel, and Walters hadn’t been called yet to give depositions. He said the filing of an appeal would indicate they refused to testify.

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.