Judge won’t step down in Bricelyn St. arson retrial

Judge Joseph Williams III said he was fair and continues to be fair in the case of a fire that killed three firefighters

November 19, 2015 08:40 AM

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

PITTSBURGH — Common Pleas Judge Joseph K. Williams III said Wednesday he will not heed the prosecution’s request and step down from presiding over the case of the 1995 Bricelyn Street fire that killed three Pittsburgh firefighters.

“I was fair, and I can continue to be fair,” he said. “I took an oath to decide cases assigned to me.”

A spokesman for the Allegheny County District Attorney’s office said the prosecution was surprised by the decision and is reviewing the judge’s order before deciding a course of action. An appeal would go to the state Superior Court.

Gregory Brown, 38, who had been convicted of three counts of second-degree murder, was awarded a new trial in 2014 after Judge Williams found that during his original trial a federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent working on the case, Jason Wick, and the prosecution failed to turn over evidence that witnesses were offered money for their testimony.

The Superior Court affirmed the decision, and the case is tentatively scheduled for trial in February.

However, on Oct. 27, the district attorney’s office filed a motion seeking Judge Williams’ recusal from the case, alleging that he has a bias against the ATF, and specifically an agent it might use as an expert in the retrial. The bias, wrote first assistant district attorney Rebecca Spangler, stemmed from an incident in 2004 during which time Judge Williams was an attorney representing a client whose store had burned in an arson. During a meeting with the client, ATF Agent Matthew Regentin and arson inspector Francis Deleonibus asked Judge Williams if he had started the fire.

In a letter to the men four days later, Judge Williams said he believed they acted unprofessionally.

Defense attorney Dave Fawcett said the prosecution only filed the motion to recuse because it received an unfavorable ruling in the case. He called it “gamesmanship.”

“They suffered what they feel is an adverse ruling,” he said. Granting the motion, Mr. Fawcett continued, would be rewarding an improper filing and creating additional delay for his client who has already been in prison for 18 years.

In making his decision, Judge Williams said he expected Ms. Spangler would have called witnesses at the hearing to further her claims of bias. Instead, he said, she did not, and therefore failed to meet the prosecution’s burden of proof to show he had acted with bias, prejudice or unfairness.