ShareThis Page

Cops: Greensburg man forced 8-year-old to provide urine for drug test

Renatta Signorini
| Thursday, Oct. 12, 2017, 3:48 p.m.
Robert Paul Geschke, left, and Jennifer Eliza Thompson
Robert Paul Geschke, left, and Jennifer Eliza Thompson
Robert Paul Geschke
Robert Paul Geschke
Jennifer Eliza Thompson
Jennifer Eliza Thompson

A Greensburg man allegedly had an 8-year-old boy twice provide him with urine so he could pass a drug test, according to child endangerment allegations filed Wednesday.

State police allege in court papers that Jennifer Eliza Thompson, 30, helped the boy fulfill the request of her boyfriend, Robert Paul Geschke, 30.

Police are looking for the pair, who they said have no permanent address and are known to be transient.

Both face charges of child endangerment, corruption of minors and harassment.

In court papers, police described three children living in a fearful environment at a New Alexandria Road apartment with Geschke, who allegedly used heroin in front of the boy multiple times between December and March.

"It was also reported that the victim was choked, locked in his room by Geschke," Trooper Christopher Cole wrote in a criminal complaint. "When Geschke would get mad at him, he would lock (the child) in his bedroom or chase him around the house trying to beat him."

A 9-year-old girl reported Geschke also assaulted her, police said.

Police allege that Thompson failed to stop the alleged abuse or contact authorities.

The children are in the custody of a relative, police said.

Anyone with information on the whereabouts of Geschke or Thompson is asked to call state police at 724-832-3288.

Renatta Signorini is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 724-837-5374, rsignorini@tribweb.com or via Twitter @byrenatta.


Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly identified the age of the boy.

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.