Cops: North Huntingdon man taped ‘bladder’ bottle to himself to pass drug test |

Cops: North Huntingdon man taped ‘bladder’ bottle to himself to pass drug test

Paul Peirce
Barry Reeger | Trib Total Media
Westmoreland County Courthouse
Robert Paul Geschke, left, and Jennifer Eliza Thompson
Robert Paul Geschke
Jennifer Eliza Thompson

Police said a North Huntingdon man used a plastic tube and a “bladder” bottle containing drug-free urine in an attempt to pass a drug test at the Westmoreland County Probation office. However, his plan didn’t work, police said, and he ended the day in the county jail.

County detectives charged Andrew R. Stevens, 39, with illegal furnishing of drug-free urine after probation officers found the device taped to his body when he showed up in the Greensburg courthouse to provide a urine sample.

Detective Ray Dupilka reported that probation officer aide Corey Miller noticed a plastic tube “sticking out of the zipper portion of Stevens’ shorts” when he appeared for his monthly drug test. Stevens admitted that he attempted to deceive authorities, Dupilka said.

Stevens told investigators that he bought the device and urine at a store in Pittsburgh’s Squirrel Hill neighborhood, Dupilka reported.

Stevens had agreed to the testing in 2017 as part of his probation sentence for retail theft.

District Judge Chris Flanigan ordered Stevens held in the Westmoreland County Prison without bond pending a preliminary hearing Sept. 13.

Paul Peirce is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Paul at 724-850-2860, [email protected] or via Twitter @ppeirce_trib.

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.