Homeless man arrested in Carnegie Library, accused of making threatening calls
Editor's note: Hoop pleaded no contest to a charge of disorderly conduct. All other charges were dropped. A Washington County judge did not impose further punishment.
A homeless Pittsburgh man, accused of making a series of threatening phone calls to police officers in Washington County and Minnesota, and giving the Secret Service a letter that threatened President Obama, was found sitting in a North Side library, surfing the Internet.
James Bradley Hoop, 57, was taken into custody on Tuesday evening in the Carnegie Library on Woods Run Avenue by Pittsburgh police Officers Anthony Beatty and Paul Abel, who had received information that Hoop was often there.
Hoop was arraigned Wednesday on warrants charging him with making terroristic threats to a state policeman in Washington County and several officers in Burnsville, Minn., where Dakota County authorities want him extradited. Hoop remains in the Allegheny County Jail.
According to the complaints:
Hoop came to the Secret Service office in Pittsburgh in October, carrying two cans of pepper spray and a letter written by someone else that threatened the president. He called back later, threatening to shoot anyone who came looking for him.
He called state police in October, threatening a trooper. He laughed and whispered the word “homicide” in the calls to Burnsville, saying he was off his medicine and that he and his brother were professional shooters who had two squads of men coming to Minnesota.
Michael Hasch is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
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.