ShareThis Page
Westmoreland

3 Norwin bomb threats cost up to $21,000, chief says

Joe Napsha
| Wednesday, March 21, 2018, 9:27 p.m.
Metrocreative

Norwin High School's three bomb threats in February and March cost between $4,000 and $7,000 each in manpower and resources expended by the police and fire departments in investigating what turned out to be false alarms, North Huntingdon's top police officer said.

Lt. Rod Mahinske on Wednesday gave the North Huntingdon commissioners his estimate as he discussed the bomb threats that occurred on Feb. 23 and 27 and March 8.

In response to the threats, explosive-sniffing K-9 officers and their handlers from Westmoreland, Alle­gheny and Butler counties were dispatched to the high school, Mahinske said. Township police also spent more time patrolling the school in the evenings, he noted.

The arrest of a 14-year-old male student in connection with the bomb threats was made “with a lot of cooperation” from Norwin school officials, Mahinske said.

When contacted after the meeting, Westmoreland County District Attorney John Peck said his office intends to seek restitution for the emergency responders' expenses. Peck said that has been the practice in other cases of terroristic threats that turn out to be false alarms.

The student faces three counts each of terroristic threats, reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct in Westmoreland juvenile court, Mahinske said when the juvenile was arrested.

The Feb. 23 threat involved just one word, and details about it weren't released to the public, Mahinske said.

Students were evacuated Feb. 27 after another threat was reported to township police. The school day resumed about noon after the building was cleared.

Renatta Signorini contributed to this story. Joe Napsha is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-836-5252 or jnapsha@tribweb.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 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.

click me