New details Today in the Dubois Homicide case of Glenn Johnston.
Johnston is charged with the shooting death of Jude Srock.
The judge ruled to move his case to the court of common pleas.
Douglas Braff was at the preliminary hearing in Dubois and spoke with both the District Attorney and Johnston’s Attorney.
After a hiccup last week in proceedings the judge moved the case of a deadly Dubois shooting, to trial.
The preliminary hearing for Glenn Johnston was held Wednesday after being delayed last week due to the prosecution wanting a stenographer present.
Witnesses such as officers and the Clearfield County Coroner took the stand during the hearing. During questioning, a big point of contention was whether Glenn Johnston shot jude Srock intentionally.
“They put on a limited amount of evidence. I don’t think they told the judge all the facts. I think there’s a lot of facts that are known, but haven’t been told, especially to the judge…that the judge should have, you know, been told, in my opinion.”
I asked Johnston’s Attorney Bill Shaw if he could specify what he meant.
“I don’t think they explained to the judge that the first time the gun went off, it was an accident. I think there’s witnesses that say that they didn’t bring that out. There was evidence that Mr. Johnston said, oh, that he was puffing his chest, and circumstances around that, that weren’t brought to the judge.”
The Assistant Dubois Police Chief says Johnston waited in the parking lot for Srock. After a verbal exchange, the Assistant Chief says Johnston accidentally fired a shot, as he pulled the handgun from his pocket. The officer adds that Srock allegedly taunted Johnston, who then shot him.
A State Trooper also says when he pulled over and arrested Johnston, Johnston mentioned there were two handguns laying on top the passenger seat.
Court documents showed Johnston shot Srock because he believed Srock was having an affair with his wife.
“I think the statements of the defendant himself, that he lied in wait, in that parking lot, loaded the firearm in his car, waiting for the victim to come out, and then confronted him. And then, obviously, intentionally shot him in the face with the firearm. I think that all leads very clearly to an intentional act.”
Although, Shaw remains confident in his comments.
“Look, there’s two sides to every story. The Commonwealth told you their narrative today of what they wanted you to hear, but we’ll get a chance to tell our side of the facts to a jury. And we look forward to doing that.”
“Obviously, we have to present it to a jury and see what 12 individuals think, that is our system. I believe that we have sufficient evidence to take this to trial and present [an] intentional killing to a jury.”
At the end of the hearing, Shaw asked the judge to drop all the charges, arguing that there was an insufficient case against Johnston. The judge, however, decided to move the case to trial.
Sayers tells me the trial should start in about five and a half months, at the very earliest adding that it could also start later than that.
