Deliberations begin in neighbor assault case

Deliberations began Wednesday for an Upper Darby man accused of pushing a gun into the forehead of his neighbor’s boyfriend last year.

Robert R. Burgess, 39, of the 1100 block of Harding Drive, is charged with a single count of aggravated assault in the altercation that allegedly took place April 1, 2025.

Jurors heard from the first responding officer, William Tully, who arrived within a few minutes of a 911 call from the alleged victim, made at about 6:59 p.m.

Bodycam footage showed Tully speaking with the alleged victim before additional police arrived to set up a perimeter of Burgess’s home. Tully made contact with Burgess and placed him into custody without incident at about 7:14 p.m.

Tully said he patted Burgess down and took a wallet and cellphone from him, but no gun, before placing him into his police cruiser.

Burgess can also be heard on the footage calling the alleged victims “rats” for calling the cops as he is led to the cruiser.

The alleged victim told Assistant District Attorney Dareus Chen that the incident began when he and his girlfriend went to get something out of her car, parked a little ways down the street a bit next to Burgess’s truck. He said there is no off-street parking on that stretch of road and finding a parking spot can be a hassle.

When they arrived at the car, he noted Burgess’ truck was parked within inches of the girlfriend’s vehicle and that he made a comment to Burgess as the defendant went to unload his truck at the same time. The victim said he had only heard of Burgess before then from the girlfriend, but had not seen him.

The man testified he said something to Burgess like, “Why you got to park so close to her car?” to which Burgess replied with a string of expletives that he did not care about her car and that she could move it if she wanted.

That prompted the victim to ask how Burgess would like it if his windows were busted out, apparently a reference to the girlfriend believing Burgess had broken her car window at some point in the past. Burgess then allegedly replied that he would “put a bullet through your forehead” according to testimony.

There followed some back-and-forth before the girlfriend said she has to live here and tried to deescalate the situation.

At some point Burgess got in her face and that the victim got between them. It was then that Burgess produced a handgun from his right hip and pressed it against the victim’s forehead.

The victim said he did not see the gun, but he felt it as he was looking straight into Burgess’s eyes.

The girlfriend said she did see a small, bronze-and-silver handgun in Burgess’s hand from the palm side with ridges on the barrel.

They described the gun staying there for about 15 to 30 seconds before Burgess turned and walked back toward his house.

The victim and his girlfriend walked toward the adjoining house and Burgess kept turning around to say, “Get back” or “Stop following me,” they said.

Burgess made motions as to reach for his right hip again at that time, but the other man he was done and just wanted to go inside.

The pressure of the gun or possibly a sight allegedly cut the man’s forehead and pictures of that injury were published to the jury.

The girlfriend told defense counsel Chris Boggs that she had reported Burgess to the police in the past but he was never arrested previously.

Former Upper Darby Detective Michael Ficchi, now with Upper Merion police, said he served a search warrant on Burgess’s home and took photographs that were also displayed to jurors.

Ficchi reported finding two magazines, a magazine holster, four boxes of .380-caliber ammunition, a BB gun in a rifle bag and vests with plate armoring, but no gun. He described a .380 as a subcompact firearm, and said serving a warrant can be like looking for a needle in a haystack.

Police also towed Burgess’s truck due to a broken window and a K-9 officer trained in finding firearms swept his backyard without success, Ficchi told Boggs.

In closing arguments, Boggs said the specific charge — aggravated assault, attempt to cause serious bodily injury — requires that the commonwealth prove that Burgess had a loaded firearm in his hand that day, which he put to the victim’s forehead. They failed to do so, he argued.

The defendant had 177 .380 rounds in his home, along with military style gear and magazines, Boggs acknowledged. He reportedly had a BB gun as well, though Boggs noted that was never actually catalogued or shown to the jury.

Boggs said police set up a perimeter within minutes of arriving because they believed they were dealing with a pistol-whip situation, though he noted that later evolved downward to a “press” against a forehead.

So either the police search of the house failed miserably, Boggs said, or that perimeter failed and Burgess was able to slip out the back, hide the gun, and breach the perimeter to get back into the house without being noticed.

Boggs conceded the evidence showed there was some dispute with the neighbors, but the thing Burgess allegedly used to cut the victim’s forehead may have been a cellphone or some other object.

There was nothing to show Burgess actually possessed a gun on that day, he said, but the commonwealth was asking the jury to make an “outrageous inference” that the presence of bullets means a gun was also present.

Chen argued that there was a 17-minute gap where Burgess was not seen. He has prepper-type items in his house, Chen said, so he is probably ready to hide something if need be as well.

This is a fairly small, compact firearm, after all, and Burgess would only need one good hiding spot and a few seconds to avoid detection, Chen said. He had 17 minutes.

Chen said the defense was asking the jury to ignore all the other evidence as well, including the fact that the ammunition found in the house was a match for the type of firearm two witnesses claimed he used that day.

Chen also argued that Burgess took a “substantial step” to cause serious bodily injury by pressing the gun to the man’s head.

The only thing he did not do was pull the trigger, Chen said. He likened it to bank robbers who take all necessary actions of getting masks, guns and a getaway driver, then stopping at the bank door.

The bank remains unrobbed, the victim remains largely unharmed, but in both situations, substantial steps were taken toward achieving the opposite result, Chen said.

It was also not reasonable to believe the alleged victims called the police, gave statements, spoke to detectives and prosecutors, litigated the case for over a year and testified twice if they just did not like their neighbor, Chen said.

The more reasonable inference here, he said, is that what the alleged victims said happened did, in fact, happen, whether police found the gun or not.