Whether Piazza was ‘forced’ to drink emerges as key argument

The difference between whether Beta Theta Pi pledge Timothy Piazza was forced or compelled to drink the night of Feb. 2 sparked argument Monday between Centre County District Attorney Stacy Parks Miller and defense attorney Frank Fina.

The afternoon session of the preliminary hearings involving the fraternity members charged in death of the 19-year-old pledge picked up with the start of cross-examinations by the defense.

Michael Leahey, attorney for the Alpha Upsilon chapter of Beta Theta Pi, briefly cross-examined State College police Detective David Scicchitano, noting that none of the officers of the fraternity house are recognized as officers of the national corporation of Beta Theta Pi. Scicchitano conceded that he had not reviewed the bylaws of the chapter or any of the corporate documents.

Fina, attorney for Beta President Brendan Young, spoke with Scicchitano for about three hours, noting that his client was very cooperative with police in providing them with the surveillance footage of the night in question.

Fina also raised the question of the identity of Tim Bream, Beta Theta adviser and Penn State employee, noting a text message from one Beta brother saying it was “Tim’s idea” that they delete screenshots to prevent leaks to the media. Scicchitano testified that when interviewed, Bream told police he had watched the bid acceptance ceremony where there was no alcohol involved and afterward had gone to his room.

Bream had not witnessed what happened regarding the furnishing of alcohol that night, Scicchitano said.

Fina brought up Trilogy, the unofficial sorority whose members were also in attendance at the Feb. 2 party. Scicchitano testified that none of the women were seen bringing alcohol to the event.

Fina and Parks Miller argued the differences between being forced to drink and being compelled to drink, as Fina claimed Piazza drank that evening of his own free will. Parks Miller countered, claiming that being required to drink as part of his acceptance created a situation that was out of Piazza’s hands.

Ultimately, Fina’s cross-examination rested on the argument that Young did not know about Piazza’s fall until about 10:39 a.m. Feb. 3 and the prosecution could not produce evidence that his client had intended to harm Piazza.

Some testimony by Scicchitano was stricken from the record, as it involved information gathered through the grand jury investigation, which Parks Miller argued was not testimony that could be used by either side.

Cross-examination is scheduled to continue Tuesday morning.

The Piazzas’ attorney, Tom Kline, spoke briefly after Monday’s hearing, saying that it was a “grueling day” for the Piazza family.

“They sat there for hours, they listened to testimony, they heard the defense counsel for Mr. Young talk about everyone else who might be responsible except his client,” Kline said. “That was very difficult for them to watch and see.”

“If anyone has any doubt about what this is really about,” he said, “it’s about two grieving parents who lost their son, and who think about him every moment in this courtroom. They’re the ones who are suffering, and no one else.”

This story was originally published July 10, 2017 at 8:48 PM with the headline "Whether Piazza was ‘forced’ to drink emerges as key argument."