PITTSBURGH — Jury selection and the trial date have been pushed back for the former East Pittsburgh police officer charged in the shooting death of Antwon Rose.
Jury selection for Michael Rosfeld will be held March 12 with the trial set to begin March 19, a judge ruled during a pretrial motion hearing Thursday.
Rosfeld had been set to go on trial next month.
If you want to receive BREAKING ALERTS, please download our WPXI News App. You can also follow WPXI on Facebook and Twitter.
Rosfeld is charged with criminal homicide in the death of Rose, who was shot as he and another teenager ran from a traffic stop on the night of June 19. Rose was unarmed.
Earlier this week, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled a jury from Dauphin County will hear the case against Rosfeld.
An Allegheny County judge previously granted a motion for a change venire, citing pretrial publicity and intense media scrutiny as reasons a jury from Allegheny County would not be fair and impartial.
RELATED:
- Judge orders jury in Antwon Rose shooting trial to be picked from outside Allegheny County
- Transcript reveals source of contempt allegations against Rosfeld attorney
- Judge agrees to release transcripts from closed hearing related to case against Michael Rosfeld
- Parents of Antwon Rose suing University of Pittsburgh
- Michael Rosfeld's attorney can review documents in Antwon Rose shooting death, judge says
- Newly assigned judge issues gag order in Antwon Rose case
- Michael Rosfeld, officer who shot Antwon Rose, charged with homicide
A pretrial hearing Thursday over what evidence would and would not be allowed into trial did not result in a decision.
Rosfeld's attorney told a judge they want evidence including two stolen guns and a 9 mm magazine found in Rose's pocket allowed into the trial.
Prosecutors argued that none of that evidence played any part in Rose being shot three times while running from Rosfeld.
"It's very important that whatever evidence wants to get in is admitted and how judge decides that in any county, is it relevant, is it admissible?" said defense attorney Phil DiLucente.
He would not speak directly about the case, but said in his experiences with similar high-profile cases, he said this is not an uncommon dispute.
"I have had cases where I believed as the defense lawyer it was extremely relevant; however, the judges have made the rulings over the years that it is more prejudicial than probative and it does not go to the defense of the client," DiLucente said.
Judge Alexander Bicket, who is presiding over the case, told the courtroom he would make a decision closer to trial.
The Rose family's attorney released a statement that said in part:
"We are rightfully confident that selection of 12 fair, impartial and unbiased jurors, no matter where they hail from, will judge this case on its merits as presented by the parties in a Court of law."