Police arrest drug store robbery suspect who claimed to have a bomb
Cranberry police are searching for a man who claimed to be holding a bomb as he tried to rob a drugstore Monday night. The man is described as white, between 5 feet 9 inches and 6 feet tall, with a thin build and brown hair. He was wearing a sleeveless green shirt, blue jeans, a black bandana covering the lower portion of his face, blue surgical gloves and some kind of black covering on his upper right arm.
Cranberry police on Wednesday charged a township man with attempting to rob a drug store by claiming he was carrying an explosive device.
Matthew Macher, 34, was jailed upon failing to post $50,000 bond set by District Judge David Kovach on Wednesday on charges related to the 9:25 p.m. Monday incident at the Rite Aid on Route 19.
Police said a man walked in holding a device with two silver pipes and wires and demanded drugs, threatening to set off the device. The man fled before getting any drugs, police said, and a search was unsuccessful.
Police released several pictures of the suspect to local media Tuesday.
Cranberry police Sgt. Chuck Mascellino said several people called police Wednesday identifying Macher as a suspect. Mascellino said police arrested him at a construction site. The charges against Macher include robbery, making terroristic threats and simple assault.
According to a criminal complaint, Macher said that the “bomb” was actually PVC pipe and an old cell phone.
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.