ShareThis Page
Woman convicted of assaulting infant asks judge to reconsider sentence |

Woman convicted of assaulting infant asks judge to reconsider sentence

| Wednesday, February 21, 2001 12:00 a.m

A Cleveland woman Tuesday asked a Fayette County judge to reconsider her five- to 10-year sentence for assaulting her infant daughter.

Andrea M. Settle, 22, was convicted at trial last month of aggravated assault, two counts of endangering the welfare of children, and recklessly endangering another person.

Settle was visiting relatives in Fayette County in June 1999 when she took her 6-week-old daughter, Alissa Scalf, to Brownsville General Hospital. Doctors found a skull fracture and sent the infant to Pittsburgh via helicopter for further tests. Doctors at Children’s Hospital found signs of broken bones in Alissa’s legs, shoulder and arms, along with a second skull fracture.

According to prosecutors, Settle admitted that she shook the baby on several occasions and threw her against a couch, causing the injury that sent Alissa to the hospital.

In the motion filed yesterday with the Fayette County Clerk of Courts, Settle’s attorney, Public Defender Jeffrey Whiteko, argues that his client shouldn’t have to serve such a lengthy sentence.

‘The defendant is a young woman … with two children. Although (Settle) was sentenced to a mandatory term of imprisonment, she believes her sentence is too harsh and severe under the circumstances.

‘A lighter sentence would be appropriate … and would be sufficient to rehabilitate the defendant, if in fact rehabilitation is necessary,’ states the filing.

is a former freelancer.

Categories: News
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.