Man wandered into a Penn State fraternity, threatened to grab his gun, police say |

Man wandered into a Penn State fraternity, threatened to grab his gun, police say


STATE COLLEGE — A Minnesota man threatened to grab his gun and return to a Penn State fraternity with his “fellow shooters,” according to State College police.

The vice president of the Delta Chi fraternity at 424 E. Fairmount Ave. told police Jacob Geiselhart wandered into the fraternity at about 3 a.m. Saturday.

Fraternity members initially believed the 24-year-old from Minneapolis was a member’s friend, but then asked him to leave after he became belligerent.

After fighting with various fraternity members, Geiselhart reportedly told the vice president that “where he was from, they handle these situations with guns.”

The vice president also told police he “feared that his fraternity was going to fall victim to a mass shooting from Geiselhart’s threats.”

Police found Geiselhart squatting in front of a bush holding a half-full bottle of vodka and 15.9 grams of marijuana. He allegedly told a paramedic he “pops off” where he comes from and made a gun symbol with his fingers.

Geiselhart also told police he was a roadie for a band that played in State College on Friday.

Geiselhart was charged with three misdemeanors — terroristic threats, disorderly conduct and possession of marijuana — along with one summary count of public drunkenness.

He was arraigned Saturday by District Judge Allen Sinclair, who set monetary bail at $25,000. Geiselhart did not post bail and is being detained at the Centre County Correctional Facility.

His preliminary hearing is scheduled for Wednesday.

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.