ShareThis Page
News

Alleged police impersonator waives hearing

| Saturday, Nov. 26, 2005

A Smithfield man has waived his right to a preliminary hearing before Magisterial District Judge Ronald Haggerty on charges of impersonating a police officer.

Connellsville police charged Harry E. Parker, 25, of 312 Smithfield-Masontown Road, with impersonating a law enforcement officer, unauthorized use of registration and driving without a license following a traffic stop Sept. 11 on Eighth Street.

Officer Autumn Fike stopped Parker for an expired registration. The police criminal complaint reports that Parker held a badge out of his window and displayed it as she approached his vehicle. The badge indicated that he was a South Union Township police officer. The township has not had a police department in years.

According to the complaint, Parker allegedly told Fike that he had been "hired by the South Union Township Supervisors to do security at Wal-Mart."

Parker also reportedly displayed a state Department of Corrections identification card and stated that he had been employed with the department. Fike's complaint states that Parker had been an inmate and the card was his altered inmate identification.

Parker allegedly told Fike that he "hoped by displaying the badge and the ID he would get a break because he showed it to the city of Uniontown police before and they let him go."

Fike seized both the badge and the card as evidence.

Additionally, the expired registration plate did not belong to the vehicle Parker was driving.

Following Parker's waiver, Fike said that if convicted, Parker could face six to 12 months' incarceration unless he has prior state charges, in which case he could face one to two years with no intermediate punishment.

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