A proposed mid-November trial was discussed Thursday for a man charged with striking and killing 15-year-old Aiden Lutz while he was riding his bicycle in October 2023.

Joshua Rivera, 41, of Butler is facing third degree murder, homicide by vehicle and other charges in the Oct. 19 incident on Dutchtown Road in Butler Township. He is being held in Butler County Prison in lieu of $500,000 bail.

Senior Judge James Arner met with prosecution and defense attorneys in a pretrial conference Thursday and discussed the schedule for jury selection, trial and other issues.

He said the court administration office provided a proposed schedule for Nov. 16-25, with jury selection Nov. 16-17.

Assistant District Attorney Ben Simon said he will need three days to present the prosecution. He said he expects to include 18 to 20 witnesses, including several experts.

Public defender Joseph Smith said he needs at least one day to present the defense, which includes an accident reconstruction expert. He gave no indication whether Rivera will testify.

A defense motion for a change of venue and venire was discussed. A change in venue would relocate the trial to a different county; and a change in venire, or jury panel, would result in summoning a jury from another county.

Smith said he filed the motion because potential jurors in Butler County could have been influenced by extensive media coverage of the case by TV networks, online media and newspapers.

In addition, he said information mailed to all Republican voters, and possibly all voters in the county, containing a history of Rivera’s previous court cases could taint the jury pool.

The mailer was sent during the 2023 election in which District Attorney Richard Goldinger successfully ran for re-election.

Smith said he wants to show potential jurors a copy of the mailer to refresh their memories during jury selection.

“I think jury selection will be difficult,” Smith said.

A jury from another county would protect the integrity of the case, he said.

Simon said there must be an effort to select a jury from Butler County before a change in venue or venire can be considered. He said the questionnaire prospective jurors fill out includes questions about publicity.

He argued showing the mailer would “poison” prospective jurors who have not seen it.

Arner said he would schedule a hearing for the second to last week in October for arguments regarding showing the mailer to prospective jurors.

He instructed the attorneys to submit their proposed questions for prospective jurors by Oct. 15, as well as any stipulations agreed upon by the attorneys. Those questions will be asked in addition to standard questions during the voir dire process, he said. Objections to the voir dire questions must be filed before the October hearing, he said.

In the case of jury selection, the voir dire process is used to determine whether a juror is qualified to participate in a trial and do so without prejudice.

The attorneys said the exchange of discovery information has been completed. However, Simon said he will ask Arner to review a ruling from the judge previously assigned to the case that requires autopsy photos presented as evidence to be black and white instead of color. Simon said he plans to present two autopsy photos and color photos show more detail than black and white photos.

In addition, the attorneys agreed to select four alternate jurors in addition to the 12 who will render a verdict.

Arner said he will issue an order addressing the trial schedule and the other issues.

Arner was assigned the case after the previous judge, Senior Judge Christopher St. John, recused himself during an Aug. 17 hearing.

Simon argued in that hearing St. John made a biased statement during an in-chamber meeting that took place after an Aug. 4 hearing. He said St. John made a number of unsolicited statements including that he did not view the case as third-degree murder and he did not believe the prosecution could prove third-degree murder.

St. John said he has been, and can continue to be, fair, impartial and unbiased. He said his comments wouldn’t impact his rulings and he has made no prejudgments, but agreed to recuse himself because he was concerned about the impact the claims of bias would have on the public perception of the judiciary.