Couple charged when 5-year-old son wanders off in Masontown
A 5-year-old boy's parents were charged criminally because Masontown police allege the child was unsupervised when he walked two blocks from his home.
The boy was in police custody for 40 minutes before an officer was able to locate James Wyatt Flanagan, 35, of Independence, W.Va., and Tonya Marie Geigan, 38, of Masontown, according to affidavits of probable cause.
On Oct. 3, a passerby reported that the boy began following her along Spring Avenue around 7 p.m. The woman attempted unsuccessfully to contact Geiger and Flanagan, police said.
At the police station, the boy told Officer Alexis Metros that “his mother left him at the residence along with his younger brother, and he let himself outside.”
Police located Geiger and Flanagan near their home, and they told police their son “runs off all the time, but usually they find them,” according to the affidavits.
Metros noted in the complaint that the inside of the home had a “potent smell” of burnt crack cocaine. Both defendants told police they last saw the boy playing outside, according to the affidavits.
Neighbors told police that they routinely watch and feed the 5-year-old because “the parents constantly smoke crack inside the residence and put the children outside and lock the door while they do so,” Metros wrote.
Flanagan and Geigan are charged before District Judge Randy Abraham with endangering the welfare of children and reckless endangerment.
Summonses have been issued. Preliminary hearings are scheduled for Nov. 12.
Renatta Signorini is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 724-837-5374 or email@example.com
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.