Indiana County man sentenced to life without parole in 2016 killings |

Indiana County man sentenced to life without parole in 2016 killings

Michael Coghlan

A 21-year-old Indiana County man was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole this week for the 2016 killings of a Cherryhill Township couple.

Justin Stevenson of Clymer was one of three people state police arrested following the killings of Timothy Gardner, 26, and Jacquelyn Brink, 20, in their townhouse apartment outside of Clymer on Oct. 27, 2016.

Judge Thomas Bianco sentenced Stevenson to two concurrent life terms after he pleaded guilty Aug. 24 to two counts of second-degree murder.

Troopers said Stevenson used a metal pipe to beat Gardner to death during a drug transaction and then one of them went into an upstairs bedroom and used a baseball bat to kill Brink. Stevenson told investigators it was his co-defendant, Nathaniel Price, 20, of Cherryhill, who killed Brink, while Price maintains it was Stevenson.

Investigators said the three made off with a safe, $200 and marijuana. A third defendant, Isaiah Scott, then 17, also of Clymer, reportedly acted as a lookout during the robbery.

Scott’s case was transferred to juvenile court.

Price, who is being held without bond in the county jail, is awaiting trial on two counts of criminal homicide and one count each of robbery and conspiracy to commit robbery. District Attorney Patrick Dougherty is seeking the death penalty against Price.

Paul Peirce is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Paul at 724-850-2860, [email protected] or via Twitter @ppeirce_trib.

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.