Leroy Fears Murders 12 Yr Old in Pennsylvania

Leroy Fears was sentenced to death by the State of Pennsylvania for the sexual assault and murder of a twelve year old boy

According to court documents Leroy Fears would molest twelve year old Shawn Hagan and then would murder him to cover up the indecent act

Leroy Fears would be arrested, convicted and sentenced to death

Leroy Fears Photos

Leroy Fears Pennsylvania

Leroy Fears FAQ

Where Is Leroy Fears Now

Leroy Fears is incarcerated at SCI Phoenix

Leroy Fears Case

The record, developed at the suppression hearing, guilty plea proceeding and sentencing hearing, reveals that, on June 18, 1994, twelve-year-old Shawn Hagan and thirteen-year-old James Naughton met with other teenagers and Appellant, age thirty-two, at a fishing hole on the Monongahela River.   The day before, Appellant had paid Naughton to bring a bottle of his parent’s vodka from his home.   Appellant and the boys spent the day drinking, swimming and fishing. Appellant, Hagan and Naughton eventually separated from the other boys and continued to fish farther down the river.   When it began to get dark, Naughton left the area and Hagan continued to swim.

Upon coming to shore, Hagan removed his outer shorts to hang dry.   Hagan sat down next to Appellant at which time Hagan’s arm brushed Appellant.   Appellant became aroused, told Hagan to stand, pulled Hagan’s boxer shorts down, and performed oral sex on him.   Appellant then asked Hagan what he was going to do about the incident.   Hagan responded that he was going to tell his parents that Appellant had kidnapped him.   Appellant then pushed Hagan to the ground, sat on top of him, and choked him for approximately five minutes.   When Hagan stopped moving, Appellant removed his hands from Hagan’s throat.   Once Hagan started to revive and cough, Appellant choked him a second time for approximately ten minutes until Appellant was satisfied that Hagan was no longer alive.   Appellant then rolled Hagan on to his stomach.   Appellant again became aroused and performed anal sex on him.   Appellant then placed Hagan’s body in the river and kept watch for approximately twenty minutes.   Appellant searched the riverbank, found a tire rim and tied it to Hagan’s neck.   He then swam Hagan’s body out into the river where it sank below the surface.

On June 19, 1994, the City of Pittsburgh Police began an investigation into the disappearance of Hagan.   They encountered Appellant while searching the area where Hagan had last been seen.   Appellant offered to help the police and advised them that he was the last person to have seen Hagan.   Appellant also told the officers that he was concerned that neighbors may suspect him in the disappearance because of a prior sexual contact he had with a young boy.   After spending several hours with detectives, Appellant voluntarily agreed to accompany them to the Pittsburgh Police Detective Bureau.

In his initial statement, Appellant discussed fishing with Hagan, but did not admit to any criminal activity.   As this was occurring, the police learned from another source that Appellant had paid Naughton to provide him with alcohol.   Appellant overheard other officers discussing this information, and blurted out that he had given the boy money for vodka, but denied making the boys drink it.   The detectives advised Appellant of his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), and presented him with a pre-interrogation warning form.   Appellant responded that he was willing to provide the police with a written statement, but that he would no longer speak with the officers.   All questioning ceased.   The police charged Appellant with corruption of minors and incarcerated him on that charge.

The following day, police discovered a boy’s body in the Monongahela River, which was later identified as that of Shawn Hagan. The detectives sought to question Appellant and he exhibited a willingness to speak to them.   Appellant was then transported from the Allegheny County Jail to the Pittsburgh Police Station and completed a pre-interrogation written waiver form.   Appellant was orally advised of his Miranda rights, and executed another pre-interrogation written waiver form.   When the detectives advised Appellant that they had discovered Hagan’s body and could link him to his death, Appellant confessed to the murder.   After the confession, Appellant took the detectives to the scene of the crime and explained how he committed the offense.   He then agreed to provide a video-taped confession wherein he again relayed details regarding the manner of death.

Appellant was thereafter charged with criminal homicide, corruption of minors, two counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse (IDSI) and abuse of a corpse.   Appellant filed a motion to suppress his video-taped statement on the ground that it was involuntarily made.   Following a suppression hearing, the trial court found that the video confession was given after at least two occasions where Appellant was Mirandized and waived his rights in written form and on tape.   Notes of Testimony, Suppression Hearing, December 8, 1994, at 51.   It further found that there were no promises made to Appellant and therefore the confession was completely voluntary.  Id. at 52.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/pa-supreme-court/1452999.html

Scroll to Top