Shooting hearing moved to June

The preliminary hearing for a College junior accused of attempted murder was postponed yesterday for the second time.

Bryan Warner's hearing has been rescheduled to June 7 because witnesses were not present to testify against him yesterday.

Warner was arrested Feb. 8 and charged with attempted murder. Police say he shot a West Philadelphia man Jan. 26 outside of a deli near the intersection of 52nd and Spruce streets.

Warner's lawyer, Richard Harris, said that the postponement is a sign that the prosecution lacks evidence, adding that the District Attorney's Office hadn't yet interviewed the victim of the shooting.

"They haven't done a significant amount of investigation at all," Harris said. "Eventually, I expect the case to be dismissed."

Officials at the DA's Office were unable to comment on the case yesterday.

Both the victim in the shooting and another witness identified Warner as the gunman from a photo lineup.

Penn Law professor David Rudovsky said that it's not uncommon for preliminary hearings to be delayed multiple times.

He added, however, that a judge can decide to dismiss a case if the prosecution continually fails to produce witnesses.

"Ultimately, if you go three, four, five times without producing evidence, the judge can dismiss the case. But the prosecution will get several opportunities to present its evidence," Rudovsky said.

Warner's preliminary hearing was initially scheduled for Feb. 16 but was moved to yesterday after prosecutors received surveillance tapes related to the case from Penn's Division of Public Safety.

Harris said the footage places Warner on campus leading up to the shooting.

The DA's Office has declined to comment on the content of the tape.

Harris has also said two witnesses can verify that Warner was inside the St. Elmo fraternity house, located at 3647 Locust Walk, at the time of the shooting.

Warner -- who lives in Connecticut -- will return to Philadelphia for the June hearing, Harris said.

Comments (3)

When the DA's office hangs on to a case with extremely slim evidence (and reliable alibi testimony)- and does so because it does not want to be perceived as currying favor to a Penn student and a member of St. E's- it is no longer acting properly. I know all that hokey stuff about Justice being blind doesn't hold much water in a world satirized by "Bonfire of the Vanities" But the real victim here is the moral authority of the DA's office, which is obligated to do more than let nature take its course in a case which it cannot win and gives every indication of being baseless. David Wallman, Lawyer Greenwich, CT

I think that DA Lynn Abraham just lost my vote. Its been 3 months, and they haven't had time to present the victim and witness that made the claim?!?!? In my 'job,' my boss would have my head for it. I agree with the previous poster! This is B.S., plain and simple. Adam, Grad Student Philly

I have had first hand experience with District Attorneys. Even when the evidence is slim to none, they do all they can to extend the case in order to keep the defense on their toes. Fellas, I strongly feel the truth is the DA has nothing on this kid. If Im the judge and the DA asks for one more extension I throw him the hell out of my courtroom. This has nothing to do about race. It has everything to do with the flawed justice system. Steve, student

Comments are closed for this item.