ShareThis Page

Furious over fatal-OD case

| Friday, Aug. 18, 2017, 8:57 p.m.

I was appalled to read the absurd accusations that the charges against Theodore Brown IV are “over-reacting” and “a stretch” ( “Defendant in fatal overdose case in Derry Twp. testifies” ).

“A stretch” is minimizing alleged deliberate and malicious actions that resulted in the theft of two souls from this world for personal gain.

“A stretch” is crying that “it is unfair” that Jesse Hudspath was bailed out because his family has money and Brown had to suffer because of his meager upbringing.

“A stretch” is having the audacity to imply that these men should not be targeted, despite their direct role in a sickness that is plaguing our nation.

“A stretch” is dismissing the relevancy of this case by saying Hudspath “took the same dope and he's here to testify.”

Yes, there is responsibility for the individuals taking the drug. However, the drug was poisoned with an undisclosed, fatal dosage of fentanyl.

Fentanyl is controlled and distributed by pharmaceutical companies for use by medical professionals. It is documented that it can be up to 10,000 times more potent than morphine. They never stood a chance.

Pulling the race card was a juvenile, political tactic. Those with a lack of morals or intelligence have to divert to redirecting blame in a desperate attempt at manipulation.

If this is already the direction that this case is going, we are doomed to be subject to a mind-numbing circus from a con artist scraping up pieces of excuses stamped as a defense.

Signed: The furious mother of the child who was murdered, allegedly by “the poor little black kid from Wilkinsburg.”

Jean Laird

College Station,


The writer is the mother of Malachai Mundorff.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.