ShareThis Page
Washington County homeowner won’t be charged for shooting, killing intruder |

Washington County homeowner won’t be charged for shooting, killing intruder

A Washington County home­owner who shot and killed an intruder on Thanksgiving morning was defending his property and will not face criminal charges, District Attorney Eugene A. Vittone II said on Thursday.

The use of deadly force by Martin Swarrow, 59, “was justified and proper in light of the facts and circumstances,” Vittone said.

The shooting occurred about 4:30 a.m. when Swarrow encountered a man who was breaking into a garage attached to his Centerville home.

Swarrow, armed with a handgun, fired a warning shot into the woods behind his house before his next bullet struck the intruder in the upper torso, Vittone said. Swarrow immediately went into the house and told his wife to call 911.

Washington County Coroner Timothy Warco pronounced Elijah J. Malanosky, 30, of Cokeburg dead at the scene.

“It’s been a long eight months. It’s been really hard on everybody,” said Swarrow’s wife, Mary, who declined to offer further comment.

Messages left with Malanosky’s family were not returned.

Vittone said the case falls under a state statute that permits the use of force in self-defense.

“Malanosky placed Swarrow in fear for his life through aggressive behavior,” Vittone said. “It is clear that under these facts, circumstances and the application of Pennsylvania’s law … justifiable use of force (was) justified.”

Adam Brandolph is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reachedat 412-391-0927 or [email protected].

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.