Thursday, September 28, 2017

Arrests Made In Downtown Graffiti Incident

WCSO CID Press Release 


Incident: Malicious Destruction of Property
Date of Incident: September 24, 2017
Location: 102 Courts St, Salisbury, Wicomico County, MD
Suspect:
  1. Christopher Thomas Aulerich, 29 of Salisbury, MD
  2. Jordan Trent Swanson, 27 of Salisbury, MD
Narrative: On September 25, 2017, deputies of the Wicomico County Sheriff’s Office responded to the area of N. Division St and Main St, Salisbury, MD, at the Circuit Court building for Wicomico County in reference to malicious destruction of property. Upon arrival, deputies observed 28 locations on sidewalks and concrete walls belonging to Wicomico County that contained graffiti written in chalk. Some of the graffiti markings were written on the actual building of the Wicomico County Court House. It took several Wicomico County employees numerous hours to scrub and power-wash the graffiti off of the property.
Detectives reviewed video surveillance in the area, and at approximately 9 P.M. on Sunday, September 24, 2017, detectives observed two males defacing the Wicomico County property. The two males were identified as Christopher Thomas Aulerich and Jordan Trent Swanson.
On September 26, 2017, detectives were able to charge Aulerich and Swanson with Malicious Destruction of Property under $1000.00 and were released on Criminal Citation.
Charges: Malicious Destruction of Property under $1000.00
Releasing Authority: Cpl J. Banks/W213 Date: 9/27/17

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

I thought Culver said that no one would be prosecuted? Ha ha! Way to go Sherriff!

Anonymous said...

What I don't understand is how?
Why law is broken?
Very Friday kids write all over the steps and sidewalks. They usually put up peace symbols and kids stuff but what's the difference?! How is one MDOP and the other is Art and acceptable?
Just seems like a big waste of money and time on two snowflakes that won't get in any trouble.

Anonymous said...

They didn't destroy anything?
Malicious Destruction of Property
It was chalk.

Anonymous said...

Where are the pictures ? Are you protecting them ?

Anonymous said...

Arrests made
Prosecution NOPE
I am certain this will be an ACLU nightmare.
If you arrest someone for a crime and know full well that it is not in the scope of the law you made a false arrest. The Salisbury Police knew this and said no arrests can be made legally. And that was after checking with the SAs office.
So here come the lawsuits!
These guys are idiots but not so much as to "permanently" deface any property or use a "permanent" maker or paint on it.
The law is clear here. It may be wrong but it's very clear.

Anonymous said...

SPD are clueless assholes being considered by a liberal bitch.

Anonymous said...

Post your address so we can chalk it up Snowflke asshole.

Anonymous said...

You sound like a snowflake.

Anonymous said...

You are wrong 8:43.
Here you go-(a) A person may not willfully and maliciously destroy, injure, or deface the real or personal property of another.

Deface is the key word. The instrument used to deface and whether it is permanent or not doesn't matter.

And yes the law is VERY clear. You are to not deface property that does not belong to you. That's it in a nutshell.
Some have even tried using the freedom of speech defense. That fell flat in fed court because the judges have consistently ruled the offender's Constitutional rights are not violated because there are plenty of other channels for expressing yourself that do not infringe on property rights of others.

Anonymous said...

" Anonymous said...

What I don't understand is how?
Why law is broken?
Very Friday kids write all over the steps and sidewalks. They usually put up peace symbols and kids stuff but what's the difference?! How is one MDOP and the other is Art and acceptable?
Just seems like a big waste of money and time on two snowflakes that won't get in any trouble.

September 28, 2017 at 7:26 AM"

First it can be argued the children are given permission by the city to use chalk. It may be unofficial permission but permission and approval nonetheless.
Secondly malicious is the key word. The children are not maliciously defacing anything. They are not doing it with malice or ill will. Unlike the children these defendants were defacing maliciously.

They can try and fight it but not seeing that as a realistic possibility from what we know. They did it. Camera caught them doing it. It's pretty clear.

Anonymous said...

Yamakawa cowards.

Anonymous said...

I thought it was squidward and sponge Bob.

Anonymous said...

Culver doesn't enforce the law.....Law Enforcement does!!!! Culver needs to shut up and go hide in his office.

Anonymous said...

Looks like they needs to take a bath and shave. Scum bags

Anonymous said...

7:28 AM guess you wouldn't care if they did this to your property!

Anonymous said...

Look at these guys! They've probably never had sex they didn't have to pay for!

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...

7:28 AM guess you wouldn't care if they did this to your property!

September 29, 2017 at 7:23 AM"


I'll answer for 7:28. No they would not care. 7:28 is the kind of person we call ruffy which translated into english means low class. The low class doesn't take any pride in anything and being of the lower class they tend to crap up things themselves.

Anonymous said...

They are smelly looking. A good long shower and a clean up would go a long way for them but ruffies don't even take pride in their own appearance much less anything else.

Anonymous said...

With bubba shoving it up there ASS.

Anonymous said...

Is that a Nazi hair cut ?

Anonymous said...

If they had a job they would not have time for this foolishness.