A judge on Tuesday, April 22, denied a motion to recuse all county Common Pleas Court judges from presiding over the sexual assault and corruption of minors case against William “Bill” Halle, but said he will consider other defense motions.

Butler police charged Halle, 60, who now lives in Westmoreland County, with felony counts of sexual assault by an employee or volunteer of a nonprofit, corruption of minors, criminal use of a communication facility and criminal solicitation, and a misdemeanor count of corruption of minors for allegedly having an intimate relationship in 2023 with a 17-year-old female who worked at the Net Cafe Center, which was connected to the closed Grace Youth and Family Foundation that he used to run in Butler.

The motion to recuse the Common Pleas Court bench was one of several motions defense attorney Joel Hills argued before Senior Judge William Shaffer.

Hills argued on behalf of the other motions that include change of venue due to media coverage of the case, requests for the District Attorney’s Office to turn over a bill of particulars and discovery information, and to suppress evidence gathered through search warrants.

Shaffer denied the motion to recuse the bench after Hills argued that Judges Timothy McCune, William Robinson and President Judge S. Michael Yeager recused themselves. He said it may be appropriate for all judges to be recused.

Assistant District Attorney Laura Pitchford said only McCune has recused himself.

Regarding his change of venue motion, Hills said media coverage of the case has been “saturational and skewed” against Halle. He said media has had access to evidence from talking to law enforcement and prosecutors, and text messages used as evidence were read on a TV news program. Hills said coverage has been “slanted toward conviction.”

A change in venue is appropriate only if a jury can’t be selected due to their knowledge of the case, and juries have been picked in high profile cases, Pitchford said.

A motion renewing a request for the District Attorney’s Office to provide a bill of particulars was filed because the office’s response to the first request was not adequate, Hills said.

Pitchford said she replied to Hills’ request by telling him to read the discovery information she provided, because it has the evidence he requested.

Hills said he filed the motion to compel discovery to obtain copies of phone calls and electronic messages Halle sent while he was being held in the county prison, and copies of a forensic interview conducted with the teenager.

In addition, he said the Attorney General’s Office denied Halle access to a storage facility owned by the nonprofit organization Halle used to run that contains electronic storage devices.

Pitchford said the messages are not in the exclusive possession of her office, and Hills can get them from the prison. She said her office has copies of text messages and turned them over to the defense.

She said her office has a policy against providing copies of forensic interviews in such cases because they can be copied and shared. She said she offered to give Hills a password to a computer program that will give him unlimited access to the interview for 60 days.

Pitchford said she has not had contact with the Attorney General’s Office.

The Attorney General’s Office declined to comment Tuesday.

Arguing for his motion to suppress evidence gathered from three search warrants, Hills said the affidavits used to obtain the warrants do not describe a crime. He said the alleged victim was 17, the age when a person can give legal consent to a relationship. The evidence in question includes social media messages and electronic messages.

Pitchford said she is not using evidence from the warrants, but the alleged victim was a minor at the time.

She called the teenager’s father to testify after Hills argued text messages on the teenager’s phone should be suppressed because he didn’t have the authority to give police permission to take the photos, and the messages were not authenticated through the phone service provider.

The father testified that he bought the phone for his daughter as a gift, paid the phone bills and had access to it as part of the rules for her to use it.

“I saw enough stuff that I really can’t put into words,” he said.

The father said he knew the messages came from Halle because he knows him, knows his phone number and knew his daughter worked for him.

“It was a matter of me trying to protect my daughter,” he said.

Pitchford said the teenager can authenticate the messages like she did at a previous hearing.

Shaffer said he would take the arguments under advisement.