Drug sweeps through Glassport area net 47 suspects, 31 arrests
A Friday morning drug bust netted nearly three dozen arrests in the Glassport area, the culmination of a 14-month investigation led by Allegheny County police.
Of the 115 undercover drug buys officers made between January 2015 and Wednesday, 86 percent of them were heroin, said Lt. Jeffrey Korczyk.
“The breakdown of this shows the problem we're having in Western Pennsylvania,” he said.
He said police seized a handgun and two shotguns, one of which had been reported stolen out of Tennessee.
The 47 suspects — 31 of whom were arrested Friday — did not operate as a single heroin ring, but rather were individual dealers, Korczyk said.
The suspects ranged in demographics, he said: 16 white women, 13 black men, 12 white men and six black women. The youngest is 19, and the oldest is 60.
Korczyk said investigators generally do not set time limits on these types of investigations so as not to tip off targets. Many know each other, and if officers arrested two or three dealers at a time, word likely would spread that agents were targeting the area.
“We work the investigation in an area for as long as it's feasible, and we're gaining new targets,” he said.
Multiple departments — including Elizabeth, McKeesport, Port Vue, the FBI and state Attorney General's Office — helped with identifying and arresting the suspects.
“I think this is a substantial thing for Glassport as a community,” he said.
Megan Guza is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 412-380-8519 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
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 â 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.