Former Plum man pleads guilty in death of wife |

Former Plum man pleads guilty in death of wife

A former Plum man pleaded guilty Monday in federal court in West Virginia to a charge of traveling across state lines to kill his estranged wife.

Nathaniel J. King, 26, of Charleston, S.C., pleaded guilty to traveling from Pennsylvania to West Virginia on Aug. 16, 2001, with the intent to harass, intimidate and kill Mandy L. King. She was 20 when she died.

Prosecutors believe Nathaniel King strangled his estranged wife and then crashed his vehicle into a tree to make it appear she died in the accident. He faces a maximum sentence of 11 years and 3 months in jail and a fine of $250,000.

“No amount of years will ever be long enough, but we didn’t want to go through the pain of a long trial,” said Mandy King’s mother, Marcy Burns, of Plum.

“It was very satisfying to watch them revoke his bond, put the handcuffs on him and take him away.”

Mandy and Nathaniel King met while attending the Pennsylvania Institute of Culinary Arts, Downtown, and married in May 2000.

The couple had a daughter, Skyler. They separated in February 2001 and were involved in a dispute over child support when Mandy King died along a rural Preston County road near Coopers Rock.

Prosecutors have told Mandy King’s family they believe she was slain in the woods and her body was dragged back to the SUV before the crash.

Skyler, who was 9 months old at the time, was in the vehicle but not injured. Burns and her husband, Ray, have adopted the child, who will turn 5 this month.

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.