ShareThis Page
Retired Allegheny County cop wins back-to-back ‘Jeopardy!’ episodes |

Retired Allegheny County cop wins back-to-back ‘Jeopardy!’ episodes

| Tuesday, December 4, 2018 7:57 p.m

Retired Allegheny County Police Officer Dave Leffler won “Jeopardy!” for the second night in a row Tuesday, bringing his total prize money to more than $50,000.

Leffler won the episode of the game show that aired Tuesday night with $19,800 —more than double the amount scored during the game by each of his two competitors. Los Angeles attorney Alexander Schwab came in second place with $8,900 and Oklahoma writer Tiffany Brooks took third after betting all her money on the final question and losing.

On Monday night , Leffler won with $33,801.

Leffler is a volunteer for the Working Warrior Foundation , a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit founded by a Marine that helps veterans find jobs and obtain food assistance.

Leffler shined Tuesday across several categories, with winning answers including identifying Josip Broz Tito as Yugoslavia’s president from 1953 to 1982, and naming a “red herring” as something meant to throw a detective off the right path.

All three contestants were stumped when it came to naming the modern pop songwriters behind “My Love is Your Drug” (Kesha) and “Locked Out of Heaven” (Bruno Mars).

Leffler clinched victory with the correct answer to the Final Jeopardy question, which called for identifying the Tampa Bay Buccaneers as the team that disappointed fans by using a stagefright parrot to make a pick in the 2018 draft.

Natasha Lindstrom is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Natasha at 412-380-8514, or via Twitter @NewsNatasha.

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.