ShareThis Page
Allegheny County judge recuses himself from 2016 Wilkinsburg mass shooting case |

Allegheny County judge recuses himself from 2016 Wilkinsburg mass shooting case

Megan Guza
| Tuesday, May 15, 2018 3:51 p.m

The Court of Common Pleas judge who for two years has presided over the case of two men charged with carrying out a deadly, ambush-style shooting on a backyard gathering in Wilkinsburg recused himself from the case Tuesday, court filings show.

Judge David Cashman made the recusal following a hearing regarding the cases of Robert Thomas and Cheron Shelton, both of whom face the death penalty in the March 2016 massacre of five adults and an unborn child.

Common Pleas Judge Edward J. Borkowski has been assigned to the case.

Police accused Shelton, 31, and Thomas, 29, of planning and executing the shooting on Wilkinsburg’s Franklin Avenue.

Police said Thomas opened fire from an alley and drove the crowd toward a back porch. According to authorities, Shelton came from between two houses and used an AK-47-style weapon to mow people down as they tried to flee.

Those killed in the shooting included siblings Brittany Powell, 27, Chanetta Powell, 25, and Jerry Shelton, 35; Chanetta Powell’s unborn son, Demetrius; the siblings’ cousin Tina Shelton, 37; and family friend Shada Mahone, 26.

None of the slain Sheltons is related to the defendant.

A trial is scheduled for August.

Megan Guza is a Tribune-Review staff writer.

Megan Guza is a Tribune-Review staff reporter. You can contact Megan at 412-380-8519, or via Twitter .

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.