A Blair County judge Wednesday denied a request by a Gallitzin man seeking a delay in his triple homicide trial set to begin Monday with jury selection.

But the decision may not settle the matter.

The order, issued by Judge Hiram Carpenter in response to the petition by Miguel Padilla of Convent Street, offers little direction for Blair County District Attorney Richard Consiglio or Public Defender Donald Speice.

As of late Wednesday, there was no response from the state Supreme Court to a request seeking an emergency decision on a similar request for a trial delay filed by Mexico.

Padilla, 26, a Penn Cambria graduate, never became a naturalized citizen and is considered an illegal alien.

He is charged with the Aug. 28 shooting of three men outside a private social club where he had been denied admission.

Consiglio is concerned that – if a jury is picked in Carlisle next week and a trial delay is granted by the state court – double jeopardy could be an issue.

The jury is being selected from out of the area because of the media coverage given the triple murders and pretrial issues.

Carpenter said Padilla’s request for a delay was improper because it was filed by the defendant rather than his attorney.

Padilla said in his typewritten petition that he was denied representation following his arrest, that he was physically threatened during his preliminary hearing and received death threats while in the Blair County Prison.

He claims Blair County has not provided enough money for trial experts and he was not included in pretrial status conferences.

Speice said Wednesday he has included Padilla when the issues impacted on his case and is prepared to go to trial to defend him in the capital murder case.

Saying the issues raised by Padilla are nonsense, the judge in his order urged the Supreme Court to deny Mexico’s request for delay.

“Counsel has been appointed for almost a year and are prepared to go to trial,” Carpenter wrote. “To grant a stay would be a tremendous miscarriage of justice to all concerned and would send a clear message that this defendant is entitled to more than other defendants.”

“In plain English, this is nonsense.”

Recommended for you