Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

OmegaPsiot t1_iwv59cg wrote

> allegedly gave the CI Cheez Doodles, robbed them, and then drug them across the road using his car before taking off.

Shit, as if the doodles weren't insult enough

45

Zealousideal_Belt_17 t1_iwv5b4u wrote

I’ll suck yo dick for some Flaming Hot Cheetos man. Shit is fire.

67

GrumpusBear t1_iwv6xvs wrote

He was charged with possession and intent to deal, but the article doesn't state if he had meth on him or not. Anymore info on this?

18

HungryLikeTheWolf99 t1_iwv9dfp wrote

And when the informant looked in the bag, he realized he'd better be halfway across the country in a witness protection program by later that day, because he was busted.

11

Kangar t1_iwvfepa wrote

First one's free and spicy

2

CurrentlyLucid t1_iwvkyu2 wrote

I can see charging him with robbery, assault and battery, but not intent to sell, he intended to sell cheese doodles to a clown.

8

Sleepy_Tortoise t1_iwvnpna wrote

Replying to alexxerth (#568,297)

Even if you sell someone fake drugs to rip them off you still can get hit with "intent to distribute" if they have other evidence of you setting up the deal under the pretense of selling drugs anyway

22

Helstar_RS t1_iwvol9v wrote

Replying to alexxerth (#568,297)

It's like I forgot the charge. In Maryland it's like fraud sham CDS but fraud in all states but since it's Cheetos idk if that would be worse than just regular fraud but probably since it was sold as drugs.

3

BillTowne t1_iwvpk9p wrote

Not a drug crime. But fraud is a different crime.

0

jay22022 t1_iww03uu wrote

It ain't easy slingin cheezey.

1

BillyQz t1_iww48rs wrote

Seems like a Cheesy bust to me

1

hedgerow_hank t1_iww76j0 wrote

The "war on drugs" stumbles on... stupidly... unabated.

1

jamcdonald120 t1_iww932y wrote

> Pierrelouis was arraigned on felony charges ...possession with intent to sell ...

TIL It was illegal to possess and sell Cheez Doodles

1

saraphilipp t1_iwxbmvh wrote

When the cheeto package explicitly says not for individual resale.

1

mad_marbled t1_iwym496 wrote

> ...then drug them across the road using his car before taking off.

How did he use his vehicle to drug the CI from across the road?

So first he tries to sell the CI some shit, but then gives him a taste on the house?

using his vehicle?

from across the road?

1

dukeimre t1_iwyy3pu wrote

Replying to Right-Huckleberry574 (#568,326)

While it's perhaps funny that the criminal gave someone cheese doodles while attempting to rob them, they were, in fact, a criminal, and they did get caught. So I'm not sure this particular example is one demonstrating a failure of policing.

1

dukeimre t1_iwziw2b wrote

Replying to Right-Huckleberry574 (#578,539)

If in fact the police officers had been robbed and the culprit had gotten away, that'd clearly be a failure. But if you try to catch a drug dealer and that drug dealer attempts to rob you and you catch him, you have now caught someone who not only deals drugs but robs their customers - seems like a success to me!

The perp was arrested for "possession with intent to sell". In other words, it seems like he had drugs and was offering to sell them, but in this particular instance he chose to instead attempt theft. The only indication I see of a possible error is that the officers put the confidential informant in danger -- that person presumably didn't sign up to get attacked.

(And obviously there are corrupt officers who make stuff up, so it's always possible that the perp didn't actually have drugs and they were planted on him, etc. etc. But I'm taking the article at face value for the sake of argument.)

1

Crooked_Cock t1_ix2jkq1 wrote

I’d take cheez doodles over meth any day, them shit’s delicious

1