Pittsburgh police charge Penn Hills jitney driver with DUI, endangerment |

Pittsburgh police charge Penn Hills jitney driver with DUI, endangerment

Aaron Aupperlee
Pittsburgh police arrested jitney driver James Bailey, 52, of Penn Hills on Sunday, Nov. 9, 2014 for allegedly driving drunk with five passengers — including three small children — in his SUV.

Pittsburgh police arrested a jitney driver who officers claim drove his SUV drunk with five passengers, including three small children.

James Bailey, 52, of Penn Hills drew 13 charges, including DUI and seven counts of recklessly endangering another person, according to a criminal complaint filed Monday.

Officers searched Bailey’s black 1996 Toyota 4Runner and found empty beer cans and a cooler filled with beer, the complaint states.

Two police officers returning from the county jail about 8:50 p.m. Sunday noticed Bailey’s SUV driving the wrong way on Grant Street with its headlights off, police said. Police attempted to stop Bailey at Grant Street and Boulevard of the Allies.

Bailey continued driving.

He took the Parkway West exit onto the Fort Duquesne Bridge and then I-279 north to the Route 28 exit. Police pursued him. Bailey left Route 28 at the Madison Avenue/East Ohio Street exit, where he stopped.

Police arrested Bailey. The front-seat passenger told police Bailey was a jitney driver. She said they pleaded with Bailey to stop driving during the pursuit, but he ignored them.

Bailey told police he drank two beers earlier Sunday.

According to police, Bailey was driving on a suspended license from a previous DUI and without a state inspection sticker.

Aaron Aupperlee is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.

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.