3 charged with robbing Churchill HS teen at gunpoint in THC vape cartridge deal gone wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why they posted the 16 yr old's name for robbery but not the 16 yr old drug dealer.

I was wondering that too. Maybe because it's considered a violent crime?

because the drug dealer is considered a "victim". Has MCPD charged him with selling?

The question is, if MCPD did not charge him with selling drugs, then why not?

Extending your logic, if a rapist is scratched by the "real victim" of the rape and then calls the MCPD, will the rapist be considered a victim and MCPD will withhold the name of the rapist but publicize the name of the "real victim" of the rape as an assailant for scratching the rapist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rich kids in W schools sell drugs to poor kids from upcounty? Do they learn business skills in school or from their rich parents?

Sorry you can't afford to live here.

We live in one of the cheapest townhouses in churchill district. I would like all the drug dealers in Churchill being exposed and removed before my kids reach high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why they posted the 16 yr old's name for robbery but not the 16 yr old drug dealer.

I was wondering that too. Maybe because it's considered a violent crime?

because the drug dealer is considered a "victim". Has MCPD charged him with selling?

The question is, if MCPD did not charge him with selling drugs, then why not?

Extending your logic, if a rapist is scratched by the "real victim" of the rape and then calls the MCPD, will the rapist be considered a victim and MCPD will withhold the name of the rapist but publicize the name of the "real victim" of the rape as an assailant for scratching the rapist?

? I was not defending the drug dealer. I was simply telling you why they didn't name him, and then asking if they had charged him with selling. Unless he is charged, he's still only considered a victim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why they posted the 16 yr old's name for robbery but not the 16 yr old drug dealer.

I was wondering that too. Maybe because it's considered a violent crime?

because the drug dealer is considered a "victim". Has MCPD charged him with selling?

The question is, if MCPD did not charge him with selling drugs, then why not?

Extending your logic, if a rapist is scratched by the "real victim" of the rape and then calls the MCPD, will the rapist be considered a victim and MCPD will withhold the name of the rapist but publicize the name of the "real victim" of the rape as an assailant for scratching the rapist?

? I was not defending the drug dealer. I was simply telling you why they didn't name him, and then asking if they had charged him with selling. Unless he is charged, he's still only considered a victim.

If MCPD doesn't charge him with drug dealing it would be a travesty of justice. What is taking them so long to decide? Did they send the pods and cartridges to a testing lab that has a long turnaround time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why they posted the 16 yr old's name for robbery but not the 16 yr old drug dealer.

I was wondering that too. Maybe because it's considered a violent crime?

because the drug dealer is considered a "victim". Has MCPD charged him with selling?

The question is, if MCPD did not charge him with selling drugs, then why not?

Extending your logic, if a rapist is scratched by the "real victim" of the rape and then calls the MCPD, will the rapist be considered a victim and MCPD will withhold the name of the rapist but publicize the name of the "real victim" of the rape as an assailant for scratching the rapist?

They will likely make a judgement call about who is the "primary aggressor" or who committed the more serious crime and only charge that person and not charge the other person. In general robbery is considered a more serious crime than drug dealing because it involves the use of violence/force against a person and drug dealing does not. They are not going to charge him for drug dealing if they think he's a robbery victim. They're just not.

[Anonymous]

Jeeze 5 days for dealing? I'd really rather they be required to do some sort of mandatory counseling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why isn’t the victim being charged with trying to buy pot?
Nevermind, he’s a Churchill student. Affluence wins again!

Come on. Marijuana possession has been decriminalized for years. Keep up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why isn’t the victim being charged with trying to buy pot?
Nevermind, he’s a Churchill student. Affluence wins again!

Come on. Marijuana possession has been decriminalized for years. Keep up.

You need to keep up — In Maryland, where this incident took place, recreational use of marijuana is still illegal and possession with intent to distribute is still illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:W's are such a cespool.

The robbers were from the consortiums, the W’s can afford to pay for their drugs. The poor kids were just emulating their parents wanting something for nothing

[Anonymous]

The mentality of Churchill is warped. I say this as a parent who has been in the cluster for over 20 years. Some kids are raised in households where recreational drug use is part of the teenage experience. The parents did drugs in high school so it's not a big deal if my child does drugs. At least one family who lives in a multi-million dollar house make their family fortune selling drugs. It's a life skill the father passed down to his sons. Then there's the disposable income that Potomac kids have. Cash equals the ability to purchase drugs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The mentality of Churchill is warped. I say this as a parent who has been in the cluster for over 20 years. Some kids are raised in households where recreational drug use is part of the teenage experience. The parents did drugs in high school so it's not a big deal if my child does drugs. At least one family who lives in a multi-million dollar house make their family fortune selling drugs. It's a life skill the father passed down to his sons. Then there's the disposable income that Potomac kids have. Cash equals the ability to purchase drugs.

Reminds me of the saying “money doesn’t buy happiness but it does buy the things that make me happy”...like drugs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why they posted the 16 yr old's name for robbery but not the 16 yr old drug dealer.

I was wondering that too. Maybe because it's considered a violent crime?

because the drug dealer is considered a "victim". Has MCPD charged him with selling?

The question is, if MCPD did not charge him with selling drugs, then why not?

Extending your logic, if a rapist is scratched by the "real victim" of the rape and then calls the MCPD, will the rapist be considered a victim and MCPD will withhold the name of the rapist but publicize the name of the "real victim" of the rape as an assailant for scratching the rapist?

They will likely make a judgement call about who is the "primary aggressor" or who committed the more serious crime and only charge that person and not charge the other person. In general robbery is considered a more serious crime than drug dealing because it involves the use of violence/force against a person and drug dealing does not. They are not going to charge him for drug dealing if they think he's a robbery victim. They're just not.

are you always so racist in your convoluted reasoning. Robbery is more serious than drug selling you say. So a kid stealing a soda bottle from a grocery store should be punished more than a drug dealer selling high potency opioids that result in overdose deaths? Clear you brain of racial distinction and let your analytical, rational brain to look at the situation. If the Churchill student was not dealing in drugs, then the three people would not have come across Churchill student.

Hey Genius, you should first realize whether the cart is first or the horse!

The Churchill student was dealing in illegal drugs so close to an elementary school. Haven't you heard about vaping deaths lately? The Churchill student should be tried as an adult and the book thrown at him. If not, its a travesty that will not go on for long - the demographics are changing and many non-whites are studying well and are having successful careers in all fields. Times a changing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why they posted the 16 yr old's name for robbery but not the 16 yr old drug dealer.

I was wondering that too. Maybe because it's considered a violent crime?

because the drug dealer is considered a "victim". Has MCPD charged him with selling?

The question is, if MCPD did not charge him with selling drugs, then why not?

Extending your logic, if a rapist is scratched by the "real victim" of the rape and then calls the MCPD, will the rapist be considered a victim and MCPD will withhold the name of the rapist but publicize the name of the "real victim" of the rape as an assailant for scratching the rapist?

They will likely make a judgement call about who is the "primary aggressor" or who committed the more serious crime and only charge that person and not charge the other person. In general robbery is considered a more serious crime than drug dealing because it involves the use of violence/force against a person and drug dealing does not. They are not going to charge him for drug dealing if they think he's a robbery victim. They're just not.

are you always so racist in your convoluted reasoning. Robbery is more serious than drug selling you say. So a kid stealing a soda bottle from a grocery store should be punished more than a drug dealer selling high potency opioids that result in overdose deaths? Clear you brain of racial distinction and let your analytical, rational brain to look at the situation. If the Churchill student was not dealing in drugs, then the three people would not have come across Churchill student.

Hey Genius, you should first realize whether the cart is first or the horse!

The Churchill student was dealing in illegal drugs so close to an elementary school. Haven't you heard about vaping deaths lately? The Churchill student should be tried as an adult and the book thrown at him. If not, its a travesty that will not go on for long - the demographics are changing and many non-whites are studying well and are having successful careers in all fields. Times a changing.

If the students know who are the dealer, could MCPD investigate this student and other dealers ? How hard to ask students to tell you the name of the dealer. They may place an undercover police in the school to fish out all the drug dealers and the adults behind the student dealers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why they posted the 16 yr old's name for robbery but not the 16 yr old drug dealer.

I was wondering that too. Maybe because it's considered a violent crime?

because the drug dealer is considered a "victim". Has MCPD charged him with selling?

The question is, if MCPD did not charge him with selling drugs, then why not?

Extending your logic, if a rapist is scratched by the "real victim" of the rape and then calls the MCPD, will the rapist be considered a victim and MCPD will withhold the name of the rapist but publicize the name of the "real victim" of the rape as an assailant for scratching the rapist?

They will likely make a judgement call about who is the "primary aggressor" or who committed the more serious crime and only charge that person and not charge the other person. In general robbery is considered a more serious crime than drug dealing because it involves the use of violence/force against a person and drug dealing does not. They are not going to charge him for drug dealing if they think he's a robbery victim. They're just not.

are you always so racist in your convoluted reasoning. Robbery is more serious than drug selling you say. So a kid stealing a soda bottle from a grocery store should be punished more than a drug dealer selling high potency opioids that result in overdose deaths? Clear you brain of racial distinction and let your analytical, rational brain to look at the situation. If the Churchill student was not dealing in drugs, then the three people would not have come across Churchill student.

Hey Genius, you should first realize whether the cart is first or the horse!

The Churchill student was dealing in illegal drugs so close to an elementary school. Haven't you heard about vaping deaths lately? The Churchill student should be tried as an adult and the book thrown at him. If not, its a travesty that will not go on for long - the demographics are changing and many non-whites are studying well and are having successful careers in all fields. Times a changing.

If the students know who are the dealer, could MCPD investigate this student and other dealers ? How hard to ask students to tell you the name of the dealer. They may place an undercover police in the school to fish out all the drug dealers and the adults behind the student dealers.

The MCPD knows at least one Churchill student drug dealer - the one who called 911. The one whose backpack contained, per MCPD, books, usb charger, student iD, pods and THC cartridges. So they already know that one dealer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W's are such a cespool.

The robbers were from the consortiums, the W’s can afford to pay for their drugs. The poor kids were just emulating their parents wanting something for nothing

Racist much?