Report of attempted child luring in Hempfield a hoax, police say
A 15-year-old boy fabricated his claim that a man tried to lure him into his vehicle Wednesday afternoon in Hempfield, state police said Thursday evening.
The boy told police the man was driving a white Ford van, police reported in a news release earlier Thursday.
He also said that on the previous day, the same suspect allegedly followed the boy on foot in the area of Todd School Road and Sandalwood Drive, near the exit for Route 130 (Humphrey Road) on Route 30. The teenager told police he was walking a dog at 2:25 p.m. Wednesday when he was approached by the white man, who asked him to get inside the van.
The boy said the van had no registration on the back.
The teenager told police he said no and ran home, while the suspect drove away on Todd School Road. On Tuesday at about 8 p.m., the same man followed the teen on foot along Todd School Road, police said.
The boy gave a detailed description of the man, including that he had a black crewcut, was shirtless and had a hairy chest, police said.
Shortly before 7 p.m. Thursday, police released an update on the incident.
“Further investigation and interview revealed that the 15-year-old male juvenile had fabricated the story of the attempted luring,” according to a second release from Trooper John Beynon.
Beynon was on patrol Thursday evening and not immediately available for further comment, including whether or not the boy will face charges.
Show commenting policy
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.
- Pitt’s challenge: Contani Miami’s Johnson, Dorsett
- OPEC decision on crude sets small producers on perilous path, analysts say
- NFL notebook: Browns’ Manziel says he tried to avoid altercation
- Fewer Dems to fight for ObamaCare
- Steelers notebook: Defense has a retro feel
- Inside the National Cathedral ‘prayer service’
- U.S.-backed rebels push forward in southern Syria
- Penguins notebook: Malkin clicking on power play
- Mirai debut brings fuel cell future closer
- The AG-designate: Tough questions for Loretta Lynch
- Salvation Army in W.Pa. uses social media campaign