Jul 17, 2024 By Mike Jones 9 min read

It took more than a decade for Scott Edmonds to go to trial in the shooting death of his wife in their North Strabane townhouse in March 2014. It took less than 90 minutes for a Washington County jury to convict him of first-degree murder in Louise Weis-Edmonds’ killing.

After five days of testimony – including Edmonds himself taking the stand – the jury returned its guilty verdict Tuesday night as the defendant sat silently and expressionless inside Judge John DiSalle’s courtroom before he was handcuffed by deputies and led away.

“Thank God for appellate courts,” Edmonds said as the deputies walked him from the Washington County Courthouse to a waiting police SUV.

While Edmonds has maintained his innocence and claimed his wife died by suicide, the jury determined he shot and killed Weis-Edmonds, 49, by shooting her in the back of the head with a .380 handgun.

District Attorney Jason Walsh hailed the guilty verdict as a victory for Weis-Edmonds’ family after waiting so long for justice as Edmonds fired seven defense attorneys and stalled the trial over the past decade.

“I’m just happy that Louise and Louise’s family finally got justice,” Walsh said. “I know it’s been a long haul.”

Several members of Weis-Edmonds’ family were in attendance for the trial and were emotional after the verdict was read.

“Finally, Louise gets justice,” said Elizabeth Weis, who is the victim’s sister-in-law. “The family has waited 10 years.”

“We want to thank everyone at the district attorney’s office, all the police and the jury for all the hard work they put in this matter,” said Martin Weis, who is Weis-Edmonds’ brother.

Edmonds, who is now 60 and has been held without bond since being charged with his wife’s killing, will be sentenced at a later date by DiSalle, although the first-degree murder conviction carries a mandatory life sentence. The jury also found Edmonds guilty of one count of evidence tampering.

Earlier in the day, Edmonds nearly derailed his homicide trial while testifying when on two separate occasions he mentioned to the jury that the lead detective investigating his wife’s shooting death was later fired due to problems with an unrelated case. Edmonds invoked the name of John Wybranowski twice during his testimony, drawing a strong rebuke from DiSalle, who asked that the comments be stricken from the record but stopped short of declaring a mistrial.

Wybranowski was a North Strabane police detective and lead investigator on the Edmonds homicide case until he was fired from the department in January 2016 for violating the township’s computer usage policy and police department orders for allegedly viewing and copying documents found on a former parks and recreation director’s computer and cellphone. An arbitrator brought in to handle a union appeal following Wybranowski’s termination claimed the former police officer lacked credibility during an internal investigation and likely lied in portions of his interviews in the matter.

However, none of that information was permitted to be introduced to the jury in Edmonds’ trial, which started last Wednesday, so he attempted to enter it through his own testimony while under cross-examination on the stand.

“Ten years of thinking about a story. The police are all liars?” Walsh rhetorically asked in his cross-examination of Edmonds. “Is that your story?”

“No, I wouldn’t say they’re liars,” Edmonds responded. “They have a tendency to exaggerate. Maybe some are liars.”

As questions continued about differences in recollection between Edmonds’ account of what was said during his interrogation and what was included in court documents written by police, the defendant named Wybranowski and his role in another case.

“Well, detective Wybranowski was fired for tampering with evidence,” Edmonds said before looking directly at the jury. “I bet you didn’t know that.”

Walsh objected and DiSalle told Edmonds to step down from the stand while the attorneys held a sidebar to discuss the situation. DiSalle then instructed the jury to not pay attention to that last comment and admonished Edmonds before telling him not to make such comments again.

“The witnesses are required to answer questions, not blurt out testimony,” DiSalle said before turning to Edmonds. “You’re nodding yes. I expect you to abide by that. Now retake the stand.”

During a tense exchange, Walsh used the word “common sense” multiple times while asking Edmonds how his wife’s death could be a suicide as he claimed and why his explanation was different than what investigators said that he told them during an interview immediately after the shooting.

“This whole case is just a conspiracy against you, right? Right?” Walsh said.

“Well, the lead detective was fired for tampering with evidence,” Edmonds responded.

Once again, the attorneys went into a sidebar and DiSalle tried to get testimony back on track while telling the jury to disregard those comments.

“Those facts are not in evidence,” DiSalle said about Wybranowski’s name being brought up by Edmonds.

Edmonds was on the witness stand for two hours Tuesday as he testified in his own defense and attempted to explain his side of the story, that he believes his wife died by suicide from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the back of her head. Edmonds, wearing a grey suit and checkered tie, spoke with a soft but low voice and laughed nervously at times while speaking. The jury of six men and six women appeared to be engrossed by the testimony, watching Edmonds intently as he spoke.

During his direct testimony, Edmonds said that his wife had become a heavy drinker in recent months after taking care of her ailing parents and the death of her “favorite uncle” six days before she died. Edmonds said Weis-Edmonds cared deeply about her appearance and once was a makeup model, which is why he surmised she would shoot herself in the back of the head.

“My wife would shoot the farthest thing away from her face,” Edmonds said.

Edmonds said they both had been drinking throughout the day when he went upstairs and fell asleep around 6:15 p.m. the day his wife died. Shortly before 9 p.m., he was awakened to a noise that he was unsure was a gunshot or the townhouse’s malfunctioning garage door closing.

“I heard a loud popping noise,” Edmonds said.

He called 911, telling emergency dispatchers he thought there was a gunshot in the house, and testified that he found his wife bleeding on the floor of their kitchen. He then went to the neighbors directly next door asking for help.

“I was in a panic,” he said. “I was hysterical.”

A neighbor came over to offer assistance as Edmonds laid over top of his wife, cradling her. Edmonds had no explanation of how the .380 handgun used to shoot Weis-Edmonds was found in the pocket of a pool table in an adjacent room.

“I looked around and saw no gun,” Edmonds said of the responding police officers who asked him to show his hand and tell them where the gun was. “I said, ‘What gun?'”

Wybranowski found the gun more than three hours later in the pocket of a pool table in an adjacent room. He did not testify, and no mention was made about the circumstances in which he left the police department.

Edmonds, a physical therapist, also denied making a phone call from his home office to a patient’s wife more than an hour before he heard the “popping” sound in which a man’s voice could be heard saying, “I killed Louise. I am sorry.”

Edmonds said he told police in his interview that Weis-Edmonds’ death was his fault since he didn’t support her enough.

“I wasn’t there for her. I wasn’t emotionally supportive of her. I neglected her,” Edmonds said. “I wasn’t unkind to her, but I care more about my work. I blame myself and still do.”

But he appeared to insult his deceased wife’s family on several occasions, prompting the relatives seated in the gallery to react to some of his comments. In one comment, he said Weis-Edmonds’ brothers were not helpful caring for their parents and in another one he made a derogatory statement about his wife’s brother, prompting one of the relatives to throw his hands on his head before leaving the courtroom.

That culminated in his final comments when defense attorney Mark Adams asked his last couple of questions.

“Mr. Edmonds, did you kill your wife?” Adams said.

“No, I did not,” Edmonds responded.

Adams then asked why he decided to testify, prompting Edmonds to say that he wanted to set the record straight for his wife’s family to hear what he claims happened rather than what was printed in the local newspaper.

“Because, frankly, I don’t give a (expletive),” Edmonds said to conclude his direct testimony.

Walsh touched on that statement in his final question during cross-examination.

“You said in your last question from Mr. Adams, you don’t give a (expletive),” Walsh said.

“It’s been 10 years,” Edmonds said. “I don’t give a (expletive). I just want to tell my story.”

During closing statements in the afternoon, Adams brought up Wybranowski’s name and questioned why he was on the prosecution’s witness list, but never testified at the trial despite finding the handgun hours after numerous other police officers at the scene failed to do so.

“We are left to wonder what his testimony would be,” Adams said.

In her closing statements First Assistant District Attorney Leslie Mylan asked the jury to use “common sense” while looking at the facts of the case to come to the conclusion that Edmonds pulled the trigger. She said they were seeking a first-degree murder conviction, which would come with an automatic life sentence.

“The only scenario from common sense is homicide,” Mylan said.

With that, DiSalle gave instructions to the jury and then sent them off to begin deliberations late Tuesday afternoon, with them returning their verdict shortly before 6 p.m.