ShareThis Page
Greensburg Police allege woman bilked 14 customers in firearms sale scheme | TribLIVE.com
Westmoreland

Greensburg Police allege woman bilked 14 customers in firearms sale scheme

Paul Peirce
1111358_web1_Bittner

Greensburg Police accused an Allegheny County woman this week of bilking $15,235 from 14 customers in an online firearms sale scheme.

Jennefer Bittner, 24, of Monroeville, was charged by city police with 14 counts each of theft, theft by deception and receiving stolen property before District Judge Chris Flanigan.

Det. Sgt. Charles Irvin alleges that Bittner placed multiple advertisements on a website Armslist.com in 2018, selling various firearms between April and October and had some of the customers reply by sending money orders to an address of “a friend” who resides in Greensburg.

Irvin wrote in court documents that the amounts ranged between $1,850 and $300.

“In each of these cases payment was made for a firearm advertised on Armslist.com. In each of these cases no firearm was delivered to any victim,” Irvin wrote in the complaint.

After speaking with Bittner, who said a friend was a partner in the sales, Irvin said that he obtained records from Bittner’s bank accounts. Irvin said the records indicated all of the checks were written and endorsed by Bittner and deposited into her bank account.

Bittner could not be reached for comment.

A preliminary hearing has not been scheduled.

Paul Peirce is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Paul at 724-850-2860, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Westmoreland
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.