Dec 5, 2024 By Mike Jones 5 min read

Defense attorneys for two parents whose infant daughter died in 2022 after she ingested fentanyl are trying to demonstrate that prosecutors don’t have enough evidence to continue pursuing the death penalty case against their clients.

Shannon McKnight and James May IV appeared in Washington County Court of Common Pleas for a pre-trial conference Wednesday morning as their attorneys suggested that investigators have no evidence that the parents intentionally gave drugs to 3-month-old Navaeah while she was sleeping in bed with the couple inside their Canonsburg home on Aug. 11, 2022.

Without evidence or even a theory about how the girl ingested the fentanyl could later prove problematic for prosecutors when McKnight and May go to trial as they pursue first-degree murder convictions that could bring up the possibility of the death penalty.

The case has been stalled for 18 months after Judge Valarie Constanzo required the Washington County district attorney’s office to provide a “bill of particulars” to the defense about how they think Navaeah and her 16-month-old brother – who was sickened but survived the incident – ingested the drugs. First Assistant District Attorney Leslie Mylan appealed that decision from August 2023, and it has been tied up in the appellate courts for more than a year, with the state Superior Court ultimately ruling prosecutors must produce something for the defense.

Defense attorney Chad Schneider, who is representing McKnight and went through that appeals process, argued Wednesday that prosecutors did not provide any clarity in their new bill of particulars filed last month in which they merely removed the word “poisoned” from the legal document. He said prosecutors continue to offer vague theories on how the child ingested the drugs that would be impossible for him to prepare a defense to counter at trial.

“It does not provide the clarity we sought or the requirement in your order or the order by the state Superior Court,” Schneider told Costanzo. “Removing (poisoning) provides no clarity. In fact, it confuses the matter. It’s a matter of semantics.”

Attorney Joseph Zupancic, who is defending May, echoed Snyder’s argument, saying that there is no proof that the parents intentionally provided drugs to either child. He said the children could have touched a surface with a substance, which would make the parents negligent, but not guilty of first-degree murder.

“The response by the commonwealth is speculation, at best,” Zupancic said. “There’s no evidence that either one of these parents provided (the drugs) to the children or that they did it intentionally. … I believe the court should compel the commonwealth to provide a bill of particulars on how they introduced these drugs to the kids.”

Mylan fired back that prosecutors suggested that the drugs entered the child’s system either through “ingestion, absorption or inhalation,” which should be sufficient with Costanzo’s initial request. She added that the defendants were habitual heroin users, and the substance included other potent drugs mixed within the stamp bags that were available for the children to access while on the parents’ bed. She added that they will have expert witnesses available to testify about the danger of the drugs found in the bedroom, including how small doses can be especially lethal for small children.

“There’s no guesswork,” Mylan said. “We’ve provided discovery to both defendants.”

Zupancic responded that the defendants aren’t charged with lesser offenses such as third-degree murder or even manslaughter, where some ambiguity might be acceptable. Instead, they’re charged with first-degree murder and could face the death penalty, despite a lack of concrete evidence on what exactly occurred in that bedroom.

“The idea that these parents intentionally gave these drugs to these kids? I don’t know how they can move forward with this case,” Zupancic said.

“They don’t have more,” Costanzo said. “That’s how I read it.”

The judge then indicated that the bill or particulars appeared to offer more of an “undetermined” theory about the child’s death since it offered so many different possible explanations. She added that the various different options means numerous experts will have to be available to testify to those theories, which would be a great cost to the county’s taxpayers, as is usually the case with death penalty trials.

“I’m happy you responded, but you included a lot of language,” Costanzo said. “Is it the commonwealth’s assertion that it’s a circumstantial case and any of these theories could be the case?”

“That is correct,” Myland responded.

Mylan promised that prosecutors have turned over all evidence they currently have, which Constanzo indicated was a key factor in moving forward so there are no surprises at trial.

Schneider acknowledged that there are many unknown factors in the case, which could make it difficult for prosecutors to prove first-degree murder.

“It speaks to the fact that they don’t know,” Schneider said. “We’re looking for the speculation … in how (the drug) was introduced into the children. If they don’t know, they don’t know.”

Costanzo ultimately denied the defense’s motion requesting for relief, but she acknowledged that the issue could come up later as the case continues to wind its way to trial. The defense attorneys indicated they might attack the prosecution’s evidence through different means as they continue to make pre-trial arguments.

McKnight, 26, and May, 33, who were shackled and wearing orange prison jumpsuits during Wednesday’s hearing, are facing charges of criminal homicide, child endangerment, reckless endangerment, possession of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia. Both are being held without bond at the Washington County jail while they await trial.