Share This Page

Uniontown police called to check out 'nasty' marijuana

A Uniontown man is facing possible charges after he asked city police to investigate when he believed he'd been sold bad marijuana.

Police did not identify the 21-year-old man, who called a Fayette County 911 dispatcher Wednesday and said he had bought some questionable marijuana.

He asked police to check it out for him, according to a police report.

After responding to the Millview Street residence, police noticed a leafy green substance on a couch. The man told police he had purchased the substance that day, and when he smoked it, "It was nasty."

Detective Donald Gmitter said a field test determined the substance was not marijuana, but the test did not reveal anything else. Preliminary results showed it was not a controlled substance.

Sgt. Wayne Brown said the incident remains under investigation, but that the man would face charges of possession of a counterfeit substance.

Gmitter said police have received calls in the past that have left them astounded.

"We have had calls before of people giving money to prostitutes for services. When the prostitute ran off, they wanted to report a robbery or theft. They thought was legitimate," Gmitter said.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.