An Albrightsville man facing false imprisonment charges that he chained his wife inside their vehicle and left her in a parking area on Jennings Street in Bethlehem will go to trial.

Witnesses, including a man who works at the Jennings Street location and the first responding police officer, testified in front of District Judge Nicholas Englesson against John Vanhorn of Albrightsville.

Dent Robert Follweiler said he was working at Jesse James & Co. around 8:30 a.m. when he was told a woman was locked in a car outside asking for help. He said he approached an SUV and discovered the victim, who asked for help and told him her husband had handcuffed her to the car, and asked him to call 911.

Responding officer Robert Constable said the victim told him her husband chained her in the car because he did not want her to leave. While they spoke, they observed Vanhorn driving away from the scene in another vehicle, belonging to a co-worker, which he was known to use occasionally.

Constable asked another nearby officer to pull the vehicle over. The key to the shackles was found and the woman was freed. The woman refused medical attention or to provide a written statement, though she did answer questions at the Bethlehem Police Department.

In a statement given hours later at the department, the woman said she is the victim of a violent crime and her attacker has been following her from Mount Pocono. In her fear, she said, she locks herself up in the car and that Vanhorn is not responsible. She said she was upset with police for arresting him.

She insisted she only wanted to contact police for help getting to Vanhorn, whom she said was working inside a woodworking shop and could easily see her.

The defense argued that because the victim at no point said she had been kept “against her will” that she wasn’t, and that her earliest statement should be considered hearsay.

Englesson said testimony made it clear the victim’s cry for help is admissible. Between her first and second statements, Englesson said, “She had the opportunity to think about what she said and changed her story.

Citing his experience with domestic abuse cases and the frequency with which victims changed their initial testimony, Englesson decided the original charge of unlawful confinement was still applicable.