Man connected to Shephard murder gets probation
by Timothy Cwiek
2 years ago | 2256 views | 27 27 comments | 42 42 recommendations | email to a friend | print
F. Bruce Covington, who’s accused of bringing illegal drugs to the home where a young man was killed in 2006, was sentenced this week to three years of probation for drug offenses in a separate incident.

In February 2008, Covington allegedly administered the “date-rape” drug, gamma hydroxybutrate acid, to a 27-year-old man during a sexual encounter inside Covington’s apartment in Narberth, Montgomery County.

Covington also allegedly injected crystal methamphetamine into the man, according to court documents.

Seventeen months earlier, 23-year-old Jason Shephard was found strangled to death inside William F. Smithson’s home in Thornbury. The victim had consumed GHB that Covington allegedly brought to the home, according to court documents.

Covington will stand trial on those charges next month; an exact date hasn’t been set. Delaware County Common Pleas Judge James F. Nilon Jr. is expected to preside over the trial.

In the Montgomery County case, a search was conducted inside Covington’s apartment, which yielded crystal methamphetamine, cocaine, marijuana, a crack pipe and other drug paraphernalia, according to police records.

Covington, a former administrator at St. Joseph’s University, faced 37 misdemeanors and two felonies stemming from the Montgomery County case — all drug-related counts.

He was not charged with sexual assault.

But on June 22, after the witness failed to appear for Covington’s drug trial, a hastily arranged plea-bargain was announced. Under the deal, Covington pleaded guilty to three misdemeanor charges related to possessing methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia.

In return for the guilty plea, Covington avoided jail time. He was facing life imprisonment, if convicted of all 39 counts.

Instead, Covington must serve three years of probation, pay a $500 fine and court costs, attend sex-addiction classes and receive treatment for drug addiction during his probation.

Montgomery County Common Pleas Judge William J. Furber Jr. also ordered Covington to stay away from the witness during his probationary period.

Covington, who holds a law degree, still faces charges for delivering crystal methamphetamine, GHB and drug paraphernalia to Smithson’s home in September 2006, when Shephard died.

He’s also charged with lying about his whereabouts when police questioned him about the homicide, but hasn’t been directly linked to Shephard’s death, according to court records.

Smithson was convicted of Shephard’s murder last November, though he continues to maintain his innocence and has implied that Covington was the killer.

According to court documents, Covington first said he went to Smithson’s home on the night of Sept. 18, 2006, for a sex party. Initially, he said he left the house before Shephard arrived, according to court documents.

However, Covington’s phone records indicated that he remained in Smithson’s house throughout the night, and left about 8:30 the following morning, after Shephard was killed, according to court documents. In a follow-up interview with authorities, Covington reportedly said he was asleep in the basement of Smithson’s house during the time of Shephard’s killing and knew nothing about it.

Covington, 58, remains free on bail, pending the outcome of his Delaware County trial.

Smithson, 44, remains incarcerated at the Delaware County Prison in Thornton while awaiting transfer to a state correctional facility.

Several advocates for Smithson attended Covington’s plea-bargain proceeding this week, and questioned why Covington hasn’t faced trial yet for his alleged 2006 offenses.

They said Furber may not have accepted the plea bargain so readily if Covington had already been convicted of his alleged offenses in the Shephard incident.

Erica Parham, a spokesperson for the Delaware County District Attorney’s Office, had no comment about the scheduling of Covington’s trial for the 2006 incident.

Rob Nardello, a close friend of Smithson, expressed disappointment that Covington’s trial for the 2008 incident wasn’t postponed until the witness could be located and brought to court.

“It’s a shame they couldn’t have postponed the trial until the witness was available, because there are still so many more unanswered questions in regard to Covington’s actions,” Nardello said. “If Covington keeps getting these slaps on the wrist, we may never really know the true extent of his involvement in either case.”

Montgomery County Assistant District Attorney John W. Aitchison, who helped craft the plea bargain on June 22, said he had no control over Delaware County’s trial schedule.

“It would have been preferable to have the Delaware County charges tried first,” Aitchison told PGN. “It’s always in the interest of judicial economy to have matters tried in the chronological order that they occur.”

When asked about requesting a continuance, Aitchison said Furber made it clear at the June 22 proceeding that he expected the witness to appear by noon that day, if a trial were to take place.

Aitchison said Covington wasn’t charged with sexual assault because of a joint decision made by the District Attorney’s Office and the witness.

“During our investigation, we, along with the victim, decided it would not be fruitful to go down that road,” he said.

Aitchison also said he couldn’t introduce transcripts of the witness’ testimony about his alleged drugging and sex assault by Covington in lieu of the witness’ actual testimony on June 22.

The transcripts were made when the witness testified at Smithson’s trial, and Covington didn’t have the opportunity to confront his accuser during that proceeding, Aitchison noted.

Timothy Cwiek can be reached at (215) 625-8501 x. 208.

Comments
(27)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
John12234234
|
April 08, 2011
Eduardo,

I hope your friend, Bill, gets raped and tortured in jail the way that he raped and tortured this poor, young man. I hope that he suffers for years until he can no longer take it and eventually kills himself. He's a disgusting human being and should have been executed. Wasting more than $1 of tax payer dollars on this filth is too much.
Response
|
September 09, 2009
The trial will be done by judge, not by jury because the prosecution agreed to waive the jury trial as requested by Covington. Why would prosecution consent to this? This could result in some interesting legal gymnastics. Verdict to come on 9/15/09.
Anon for this
|
September 09, 2009
I am looking for a summary of Covington's trial today. Has anyone atttended?
Enough
|
August 30, 2009
Ok, I have been reading these comments for weeks now and have kept silent! This has gone far enough. When fictitious statements are made about someone is one thing, but when they throw my name is it is something else. Bill never told me that he killed anyone. If you would have read the full statement, then you would have known that, yes, Covington WAS mentioned in it. More than once was Covington mentioned. You are only relaying incorrect information that you read in the one sided Daily Times. Please, as others have said before, get the accurate, factual information before you go posting please. I understand and accept that people have the different opinions, but when everyone starts going back and forth with incorrect, fictitious information, it is pointless. Furthermore, if you "condemn" Covington then please explain what sentence you think he should receive in this mess. Also, the "fact" that you mentioned in you last post is nothing but speculation. There was no evidence, other than circumstantial, that was presented at trial. There was never ANY testimony that was provided that said that Smithson killed anyone. Furthermore, why would Smithson try to drug and rape a coworker, just to have to face him in the morning and try to explain why he woke up naked in his house after only having Gatorade? Use your head. Smithson knew that he would have to work with him the following day. Why would he try to do that? HELLO!!! And Smithson did not take the stand to tell his side because his lawyer and family advised him not too. Also, the DA's office was threatening to bring in a prison informant to testify against Smithson, saying that while in jail, Smithson confessed his crimes to him. If that was the case and that Guy was honest, then why didn't they bring him in to testify regardless of whether Smithson took the stand or not! They were doing that to keep Smithson from telling his side of the story, because his story was the one that could have put everything in place and explain it all. Seeing how corrupt the DA's office was, I would have been suicide for him to take the stand, whether he was guilty or not. If you were there at the trial you would already know all of this information. Please, I am not being rude or anything but please educate yourself with the actual facts of the case before you go acting as if you are the prosecutor. Thank you.
anonymous
|
August 30, 2009


You guys are funny! Hall testified (at trial) that your "boy" called him to come to Pa and when Hall arrived, Smithson admitted he drugged him and then killed him...during his statement to Hall he never mentioned Covington, never. Your perception of my comments as "sticking up for covington" are, again, paranoid thoughts. I condemn covington for his role and he will most certainly pay, as Smithson will. My point is this: Smithson killed Jason = fact. He must now do the time for it. You claim he has "found God." if so, then he would be reflecting on his horrid (unforgivable)actions and asking for forgiveness but instead he is filing appeals and fueling people like yourselves. Cut us all a break and stop blogging ridiculous comments like the ones before. Smithson killed Jason to avoid getting caught for drugging and trying to rape him= fact.

by the way, smithson had a chance to tell his story but decided not to take the stand. Without any prior convictions, he decision speaks volumes. Hall's in court statement is an exception to hearsay because it was a flat out admission to the murder. ..Now who would admit to killing someone if they did not?

Lastly, SMithson doesn't care about you, at all. Believe me, he is a narcissistic psychotic killer. He is using you, especially now that he is alone in jail.

This will be the last time I waste one second responding to your comments as they are ridiculous
To the Smart One
|
August 30, 2009
Maybe He is either Frank E or Bruce Covington! Maybe the are one in the same! After all, Frank E has stuck up for Covington since the beginning, what is to say he isn't on his side
To anonymous
|
August 29, 2009
Once again you have facts mixed with fiction. The copies of the search warrants were not EXACT copies. They lacked signatures from the Judge, the county seal, along with other, very important information. Please, before you go ranting on and on, find out what is true fact and what is not! Thank you!
anonymous
|
August 29, 2009
Smithson never, ever admitted killing Jason TO ANYONE, if you were at the trial you would know that, may have missed that or maybe you just don't get that. Dan Halls Testimony was compelling but how accurate could it be if he was not there in the house like Bruce Covington was... So why did they allow him to testify and not Covington who admitted to being in the house at the time of the murder (after lying the first time he was questioned)??? If he admitted to bringing the drugs in his first statement why lie about being present at the time of the murder.

How could Smithson admit to anything if they never allowed a statement of his to be read in court. Tell me all knowing person about the trial; Did the authorities even take a statement from Smithson?

Is Dan Hall the lead investigator in this case? Isn't his testimony what they call "hearsay"? Does anyone know the state of mind he was in when the Police approached him... Was this other witness that Dan Hall told there at the time of the murder like Covington was or is he just another player in this game of whisper down the ally.

You are very smart, you seem as smart as say... a lawyer. So if you are that intelligent then why would you condone the role of Bruce Covington in the events of that night. Why would you be so willing to allow them to keep overlooking his predatory behavior and the role of the drugs he administered that night?

You are correct, this appeal will most likely be denied. The denial of this appeal is not the end of the road for Bill. We are not going away until all of our "paranoid" questions are answered. It could take years and years but we are not going anywhere. I do hope in the process it will help many gay people have a better self image and understand that equality means that we deserve fair trial too. Equal justice in the law. Equality can help so many in our community in so many ways.
anonymous
|
August 29, 2009
Nope, your right, I didn't read that article and don't need to cause, like I said, I was at the trial from beginning to conviction (yeah!). His appeal will be denied very very quickly so don't get your little hopes all up in a bunch. He's guilty, he did it, and he will pay. unfortunately all of us have to pay for his meals for the rest of his life - hence, the need for the death penalty. Btw, the original warrant was misplaced but exact copies were available - you're not that bright - how the hell does the original vs. an exact copy diminish the fairness of his trial. Also, Smithson told the police to look in his basement for Jason, and um, yep that is where he was discovered. There is no basis for your assertions that lost ORIGINAL warrants effected his constitutional rights at trial. Second, Hall signed what you now describe as an inaccurate transcription of his testimony, plus he told another witness exactly what he told the police. ..so throwing assertions that things "mysteriously" disappeared to raise suspicion against the police for wrongfully pursing an investigation into Smithson, the one how ADMITTED TO KILLING JASON, is psychotic.

Your continued paranoia helps no one in this world. It may be best for you to accept the fact that smithson took the life of a beautiful young man due to a sick sexual fantasy. If you want to forgive him and move on from it, then that is your decision. but posting trash like this horrible.
to the smart one
|
August 28, 2009
Great way to try to distract readers from another great article that was written today by Tim Cwiek, about Smithson's pending appeal. You see the sloppiness of the investigation is addressed in the appeal. But the warrants were not the only only items that were lost... The tape (which was inaccurately transcribed) of Dan Hall's testimony mysteriously disappeared too. I wonder why?

The answer to your question is NO - I think they made it a Capital punishment case because the judge allowed the DA to play that card. You see it was never a death penalty case and if you paid more attention at the trial you would have seen that... Even the sleeping jury could see that. That is why they gave him life, a life Bill will use to continue to fight for a further investigation into this Covington person.

the smart one
|
August 28, 2009
Hey all! Your comments are comical. I sat through Smithson's trial and he had a fair trial with the help of TWO very good attorneys at his side. At no point did the jury look as if they were falling asleep, how could they after listening to the horrible things that Smithson had done to Jason. Covington supplied the drugs that Smithson used on Jason before he attempted to rape him. If you (so called friends of smithson recall) remember, Smithson explained everything that had happened to Dan Hall the next morning. At no point did he ever mention Covington's involvement or that Covington knew about the murder. Instead, Smithson explained in detail how he drugged Jason, and then when he was trying to rape him, Jason fought back and Smithson strangled him TO DEATH. Smithson did it, did it alone, and now he will pay and die alone in a jail cell. So exactly what he deserves, well, short of the death sentence. If the DA and the Judge were in conspiring against Smithson don't you think he'd be in line for the chair right now? I sure do.

Cheers.
Bill Supporter
|
August 02, 2009
Eduardo, very well spoken! Bravo!
Eduardo
|
July 31, 2009
‘In dubio pro reo’ vs “Resolve in favor of the Commonwealth’

Bill-freak: I will answer to your comment only because you asked for it. So here is my answer: examine your motives.

It is plain to all that your opinion is tainted in both prejudice and hatred. In contrast, my comments are rational, clear, clean and just: I rise to the defense of an un-fairly convicted gay man, not just because this gay man is my friend, but because that gay man was not given a Fair Trial.

I would do the same for you, and for any of our readers.

What is your stand?

Do you contend there was a full investigation? Do you contend that something other than speculations were presented at the trial?

Do you contend that that was Fair Trial at all? Do you contend that the Judge did not instruct the Jury to convict?

What exactly do you bring to the table?

This is what happened in a nutshell:

1) THERE WAS NO FULL INVESTIGATION.

The Delaware County system considered that it was more efficient to make Bill Smithson their ONLY suspect.



However, we know, the record show, and the Media also reported, that there was another man in the house: that man was F. Bruce Covington. That man was a capable as (or more capable than) Bill to carry on with the murder.

Why was Bill the only person investigated and tried? Where is the exculpatory evidence for Covington? Why was his name suppressed from the Jury’s deliberations?

2)THERE WAS NO FAIR TRIAL. The DA (under the complacent oversight of Judge Dozor) offered speculations in place of facts. Further to this, the prosecution corrupted the fundamental concept of the presumption of innocence.

This principle ‘the presumption of innocence – being considered innocent until proven guilty – is a legal right that Bill was denied.

The burden of proof was on the prosecution (the DA), which had to collect and present enough compelling evidence to convince the trier of fact. The DA should have been restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony that is legally admissible, to demonstrate that the accused was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

This was not done. And this was not done because Judge Dozor allowed the DA speculations as actual evidence.

The only way that the DA speculations could have been remotely sufficient to convict was IF Bill and Jason were the only two people in the house, but that was not the case…so reasonable doubt stands.

In case of remaining doubts, the accused is to be acquitted (this is the emaning of in dubio pro reo: which translated means in case of doubt rule for the defendant). That is basic principle in Law.

The problem here is that we have a rogue Court System. In Delaware County ‘in dubio pro reo’ does not exist. This presumption of innocence -which stems from the Latin legal principle that ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies)- has been corrupted and supplanted by a monstrous practice where ‘doubts’ are resolve in favor of the Commonwealth (this means whatever the Judge and the DA think the case is).

That practice is the utter corruption of the Principles of Law.

I hope that this reply serves to make the reader realize that I seek JUSTICE not just for Bill and Jason, but for the innocent victims of a corrupt Delaware County System.

A Bill Freak
|
July 31, 2009
The word lured that you use below is on of the DA's suppositions that Eduardo speaks of. Consider the facts not suppositions.

Your hate for Bill is your prerogative, it is your admiration of this Covington person that concerns me?
Re: Bill Freaks
|
July 31, 2009
You have no IDEA what you are talking about. You do not know all the evidence nor anything else about any of this. How can you say that Bill took an innocent life? Were you at the house that night? If you don't like what we have to say, then I suggest that you stop reading it. Thank you for understanding. Have a nice day.
to the bill freaks
|
July 30, 2009
What is wrong with you people? Ed-you point out Covington lied...so did Bill! You "won't go away"...please...please go away! How dare you sa Bill is innocent! Your nonsense and keeping this going amongst the three of you claiming there are many just makes me sick! And Friend of Bill---the Devil did walk amongst us - I agree - but he is now in Prison. I am so glad Bill found God...unfortunately a little too late to help Jason! I am sure that my God does not forgive Bill. Bill took an innocent life...Bill-it was all the planning of Bill to get Jason so regardless of Covington's lack of involvement it was Bill-Bill-Bill who lured Jason to his home and left him for dead in his home for days. Explain that away while you are waiting for Covington's answers. Sick.
Eduardo
|
July 03, 2009
All about F Bruce Covington is a charade, and it should be because members of a corrupt Court System are COVERING their tracks.

Those who followed Jason’s murder case and witnessed the trial know that Judge Dozor and DA Thomas Lawrie used an impressionable and incompetent Jury (members of which were sleep at times!!!) to ‘cook’ Smithson’s conviction.

F Bruce Covington (aka, Bruce Chapman for the Gay/Drugs underworld) should have been at the least ‘a person of interest’ and the most important source of information in Jason’s murder trial. That should have been the minimum.

Logically, Covington should have been investigated and subjected to the trial as Smithson was. This is because Covington or Smithson could have strangled Jason (not just Bill).

Covington lied to the police by telling them he was not in the house when the murder happened.

A few months later, Covington was ‘caught’ in the –How would we say it- “alleged” (?) drugging and rape of Manny: oddly smilar to Jason's case.

Instead investigating Covington or –at minimum- of bringing him to testify Thomas Lawrie and Judge Dozor gave outmost importance to the testimony of a person who had not been in the house at the time of the murder. A person whose testimony was not preserved on tape.

It seems there is a ‘tradition’ in Judge Dozor's Courthouse to send to jail anyone who deserves it, not according to Justice, but according to legal tricks.

Protecting Covington is just one of them.

Why am I writing this: Because Bill Smithson is innocent.

I am just one of Bill's many friends, Gay or Straight, Democrats or Republicans, Christians or non-Christians, who have made a commitment to bring Justice to Bill and Jason.

We are numerous, we have the means, we know the truth, we will not go away.
I found some info
|
July 01, 2009
" I just found an article that might explain a lot! This might explain why Covington is allowed to remain free. It seems that a special someone in the courthouse calls himself "the god of Delaware County"! Check out the article for yourself!

http://temoinsde.jehovahforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=82 "
anonymous
|
June 27, 2009
Friend of Bill
|
June 27, 2009
I thought I remember someone saying that Covington could not be charged with the murder of Jason, I hope that is not true.

I hope everyone who reads this article also reads the article in Delco times. It is a good article, please take the time to read it if you haven't.

Remember they say the devil walks amongst us, and beleive me, we all can see that he does. I am certainly glad that I am not a fly, because according to Covington's lawyer, Bruce would not harm a fly on the wall. You have got to be kidding me - Just humans I guess. He not only harms them he sucks the life out right from underneath them with them not even being able to defend themselves.

My freind Bill, has found God, and will be able to move forward, where ever he is. God is by his side and has forgiven him of his bad choices he made in his life. And if I have to thank Delco Cnty for anything it is to have given Bill the time to find himself before it was too late.

So there Mr DA and Judge in your trying to kill my friend - you might just have saved his life.

As for Covington, every dog has his day. I just hope nobody else falls victim to him in the meantime.