Neck tattoo with Greensburg man’s name foils fake ID, police say |

Neck tattoo with Greensburg man’s name foils fake ID, police say

Renatta Signorini
Chad Marques Stitch

The tattoo gave it away.

A Greensburg police officer knew a Greensburg man was giving him a fake name, according to court papers.

The evidence was right there in front of him — tattooed on the suspect’s neck.

Chad M. Stitch, who turns 35 today, was riding in a car that was pulled over Wednesday after it was suspected to be involved in a drug deal, according to police.

Stitch is being held in the Westmoreland County Prison on $300,000 bail.

A witness reported to police an apparent drug deal involving a blue Chevrolet Malibu at 7:15 p.m. in a parking lot along South Main Street. At the same time, police saw the same car speeding in that area, eventually catching up with it close to the Cedar Street exit of Route 30, according to an affidavit.

The passenger identified himself as “Chad Majors,” but Detective John Swank called his bluff. Swank had arrested Stitch in 2012.

“I told Stitch that he had provided a false name and I knew he was Chad Stitch,” Swank wrote in the complaint. “He denied that and stated that his name was Chad Majors. I observed “Stitch” tattooed on the left side of his neck and told Stitch that his name was tattooed on his neck.”

Police said they seized about 40 bags of suspected heroin stamped “Super Mario” and “Polo,” 23 Ecstasy tablets, marijuana and $180.

Stitch is charged with drug offenses and false identification to police.

He did not have an attorney listed in online court records. A preliminary hearing is set Thursday.

A drunken driving charge is pending against the car’s driver, police said.

Renatta Signorini is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 724-837-5374, [email protected] or via Twitter @byrenatta.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.