ShareThis Page
Knoxville woman gets shorter sentence for deadly botched robbery |

Knoxville woman gets shorter sentence for deadly botched robbery

Megan Guza
| Wednesday, March 21, 2018 1:57 p.m
Destiny Walker
Destiny Walker

A woman previously facing a maximum sentence of life in prison for second-degree murder pleaded guilty Wednesday morning to third-degree murder for her part in the deadly botched robbery of a North Braddock man in 2015.

Destiny Walker, 19, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 80 to 160 months in prison Wednesday by Common Pleas Judge Randal Todd, according to the Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office. That’s a sentence of roughly 6 12 to 13 years.

Walker was 16 in September 2015 when she and Jordan Johnson, then 18, walked into the Ridge Avenue home of Harry Vaughn with the intent to rob him. Vaughn, 65, emerged from the bathroom when he heard a commotion and tried to wrestle a gun from the teens. He was shot twice in the chest.

Johnson pleaded guilty to third-degree murder in January 2017 and was sentenced to 17 12 to 40 years in prison as part of the plea agreement. Walker opted for a non-jury trial. Common Pleas Judge David Cashman last year found her guilty of second-degree murder — which would have netted her a mandatory maximum sentence of life in prison.

Her attorney, Milton Raiford, filed a petition for relief, arguing that it would be unjust for Walker to face a term so much more extreme than Johnson’s. Cashman agreed, vacating the verdict, recusing himself and sending it back to square one.

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.