Charges against Connellsville woman in 2001 beating death dismissed |

Charges against Connellsville woman in 2001 beating death dismissed

John F. Brothers/Daily Courier
Crystal Weimer (left) is led by Connellsville police Officer Ronald Haggerty Jr. to a waiting police car after being arraigned in the death of Curtis Haith in 2001.

A Fayette County judge Monday dismissed all charges against a Connellsville woman who spent 11 years behind bars on charges she helped beat a man to death in 2001.

Judge John F. Wagner Jr. overturned 39-year-old Crystal Weimer’s conviction and sentence in October.

On Monday, Wagner dismissed all charges, including a homicide charge filed by Connellsville police, during a pretrial hearing in Uniontown to decide whether Weimer should be retried. The decision means the charges against her cannot be retried by District Attorney Richard E. Bower’s office.

Weimer was serving up to 30 years in state prison on a third-degree homicide conviction in the beating death of Curtis Haith, 21, when Wagner freed her on $20,000 unsecured bond in October, pending a new trial.

Haith’s badly beaten body was found outside his apartment with a gunshot wound in the face.

Wagner granted the new trial because a forensic dentist whose testimony on bite-mark analysis helped convict her in 2006 called it “junk science” during the October hearing. During Weimer’s trial, Dr. Constantine Karazulas of Bridgeport, Conn., testified that a bite mark on Haith’s hand matched a dental impression Weimer gave police.

His testimony, along with that of alleged accomplice Joseph C. Stenger, 32, of Everson, helped convict her.

But in October, Karazulas testified that recent advances in bite-mark evidence rendered the analysis “junk science.”

Weimer’s attorneys contended that without the bite-mark evidence, prosecutors had no physical evidence to tie her to the homicide.

Stenger had testified that Weimer helped lure Haith to the scene. He is serving nine to 18 years for conspiracy to commit homicide.

Weimer has always asserted her innocence.

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.