Archive

ShareThis Page
Witnesses help identify 2nd teen charged in killing Hill District man | TribLIVE.com
News

Witnesses help identify 2nd teen charged in killing Hill District man

Witnesses who came forward during a preliminary hearing for an accused shooter helped Pittsburgh police identify a second suspect in the Hill District shooting, court records show.

Police on Thursday arrested Jameel Porter, 17, at his home on Ledlie Street in the Hill District, Lt. Daniel Herrmann said. Porter is charged with homicide, robbery, conspiracy and possession of a gun by a minor.

Porter and Jamal Daniel, 17, of the Hill are accused of shooting Andre Roberts, 23, of the Hill in his vehicle on Webster Avenue on June 23.

Investigators used cellphone records, video surveillance, DNA testing and an interview with a witness who was inside the vehicle to tie Daniel to the shooting. A judge ordered him to stand trial on charges of homicide, robbery, conspiracy and gun possession by a minor at a hearing in October.

Video surveillance obtained from the Samba Mini Market on Bedford Avenue showed a teen identified as Daniel walking with another young man just before the shooting. A police sergeant told homicide detectives the second person was Porter.

After Daniel’s preliminary hearing, Roberts’ family and friends asked detectives to see the photos taken from the market video, according to a criminal complaint against Porter. One of them, whom police did not identify, pinpointed Porter as the other teen in the video.

A judge arraigned Porter early Friday and ordered him held without bail at the Allegheny County Jail. A preliminary hearing is scheduled Dec. 12.

Margaret Harding is a Trib Total Media staff writer. Reach her at 412-380-8519 or [email protected].


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.