Skip to main content

Bank robbery reported in Corfu

By Billie Owens

A white male reportedly robbed the M&T Bank in Corfu. He displayed no weapon, but took a bunch of cash. He hand-carried the money. He fled on foot. No word on any vehicle involved.

He was wearing a black scarf over his mouth, a light gray hooded sweatshirt -- with the hood up. One teller said he was about 5'10" tall.

The bank is located at 1 E. Main St. The robbery was reported at 2:01 p.m.

Authorities have ordered Corfu School shut down as a precaution.

Sheriff's deputies are en route and scouring the area.

The Thruway Authority is being notified to be on alert.

UPDATE 2:16 p.m.: The man is believed to be light haired and without facial hair. They guess his age is late 20s, early 30s. Possibly his hoodie has the word "Pepsi" on the front, but that's not certain.

UPDATE 2:22 p.m.: The authorities are sifting through tips now. A person reports that he saw a man in the "Four Corners" area in a four-door silver sedan, possibly a Pontiac made in the '90s. (But one person says the vehicle is "more slopey in front than the boxy '90s model." When the man got out of the car, he was wearing a gray sweatshirt and he put the hood up. There are tracks to where the car was last seen. Sheriff's deputies are calling in a canine unit and they are reviewing available video tapes.

UPDATE 2:45 p.m.: Authorities have allowed the school is be unlocked.

Peter O'Brien

I disagree. There was no evidence that he had a weapon, let alone that he had any intention of raiding the school. He was after money. He got it and took off.

Locking the school down is about as useful as Duck and Cover. He could just break in through a window if it mattered that much to get in the school.

Jan 3, 2011, 3:08pm Permalink

As a parent with two children in the Corfu school, I agree locking down the school so a desperate, on foot, criminal looking for someplace to hide could not do so in the school. I fail to see that move as a weakness. It was simply smart to remove one option for the quarry to use.

Jan 3, 2011, 3:12pm Permalink

It isn't about the school being a next target as much as making one less place to hide. Especially is he is on foot and the school is as close as it is and large enough to get lost in quickly.

Jan 3, 2011, 3:14pm Permalink
Lori Silvernail

Lockdown is a good idea, whether he showed a weapon or not. Imagine YOUR child being grabbed and held hostage by a criminal who realizes he has no way out.

If someone robbed a business at the end of my street (I'm off Main Street in Batavia) and I read about it here, you'd better believe I'd have my doors locked!

Jan 3, 2011, 3:25pm Permalink
Lisa Falkowski

Kudos to those protecting the children! Showing a weapon or not, does not mean that the individual is not dangerous. Besides, it's not something children (especially young children) should be subject to. That school houses kids 8-12 yo. Good thinking on account of local school and police authorities.

Jan 3, 2011, 3:34pm Permalink
John Roach

Peter,
You're way out of touch on this. A fleeing felon who thinks he may be caught, just might run into the school out of panic. And if panicked, who knows what could happen.

And, the fact he did not display a weapon does not mean he did not have one. The fact that you would be willing to put kids at risk because you think he is unarmed and harmless shows, to me at least, a major lack of judgement. That school is not that far from the bank.

Jan 3, 2011, 3:43pm Permalink
Gabor Deutsch

Never take your children in or near a BANK ! That is a real lack of judgement. Banks get robbed and everyone knows that people who steal really want to harm children.

Jan 3, 2011, 5:36pm Permalink
Dave Olsen

Substitute "Corfu Bank" for "Glendale train", & "made clean off with 50 bucks and left the school locked up" for "made clean off with sixteen g's and left two men lyin' dead". Then sing along.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/IOk71pHqCu8?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IOk71pHqCu8?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Jan 3, 2011, 5:41pm Permalink
Bruce Ross

Peter

You complain that they locked the school down and say there was no reason to lock it down but if they didnt lock the school down and the robber got in to the school that your child was in I bet you would be the first one on the phone with a lawyer figuring out how to take them to court over it.

Jan 3, 2011, 6:03pm Permalink
jennifer draves

did anyone hear anything more on this? One of my friends on Facebook left a comment that they caught the guy in Batavia a few hours ago... but i looked on every news site and haven't seen where they arrested anyone yet... Hopefully they do catch whomever is responsible!

Jan 3, 2011, 7:21pm Permalink
Gabor Deutsch

I am not against the Corfu school being locked down. I saw on TV they said all Pembroke schools ? My argument is how much panic and fear do you need to create out of an unarmed petty thief. I understand that banks are so strapped for cash that a grand or so is worth tax payers 25 grand to chase around someone and corner them. I know some banks have those camera video things that might work. I gotta believe that anyone who robs a bank now a days aren't the smartest person to begin with so give them a head start and follow the cookie crumbs !

Jan 3, 2011, 7:59pm Permalink
RICHARD L. HALE

Apparently there was no dye pack or homing device in the bag with the money. This has become common practice in the big cities. I think this should be taken a step farther, about 2 pounds of plastic explosives in the bag. The bank would wait about 5 minutes before detonating it. No dogs, no helicopters, extra police. The robber would be easy to find, hard to identify though.... Some parts here....some parts there....more over there....

Jan 4, 2011, 12:25am Permalink
Peter O'Brien

First, I don't go around suing people.

Second, if I had a kid in that school I still wouldn't want it locked down. There was no threat to the school and even if it was locked what stops him from busting a window and going in that way?

Third, if society is too dangerous for you, then you need some lessons in survival and stop relying on the government to provide you will everything.

The over reaction is not necessary for any reason and there were no kids in danger.

Jan 4, 2011, 7:47am Permalink
Jason Murray

peter how do u know there was no threat to the school? do you have 'special' inside info we dont know about and a gray sweatshirt you want to get rid of

Jan 4, 2011, 10:26am Permalink
John Roach

Peter is clairvoyant. He knows from the bare minimum of information that this guy definitely did not have any weapon and was absolutely no danger to anyone. Peter also knows for certain that the guy would not have panicked if close to being caught.

Jan 4, 2011, 10:33am Permalink
Dave Olsen

It's basic tenant of damage control, Peter. You learned this in the Navy, I'm sure. If you have an area that you can isolate from a threat, you do so. Compartmentalizing, if a door is closed and water is not getting in, you leave it closed, and maintain water tight integrity. The kids were in school and safe, the prudent thing was to keep them there until you have more information on what the situation is, once that was determined, they let the kids go home. I'm no supporter of police control of our lives, but they are there to manage emergencies and protect the public.

Jan 4, 2011, 10:45am Permalink
Howard B. Owens

One additional thought, which Dave alludes to -- lock down isn't just about keeping the bad guy out, it's about keeping the kids away from trouble.

How safe would it be to have a bunch of kids in the village or nearby with police cars flying around and a criminal who may or may not be on foot who may or may not be armed running around?

Contain the kids until more information is available. Seems prudent and hardly a threat to liberty to take that approach.

It was probably bad enough for the cops to have a bunch of us media busy-bodies nosing around while they're trying to track footprints and talk to witnesses. Imagine a bunch of school kids flooding the zone on top of that.

The lock down in June 2009 for the Elba robbery, where it was countywide -- that was probably a bit much -- but locking down a school right near where the crime took place, seems pretty sensible.

Jan 4, 2011, 11:03am Permalink

Posted by Peter O'Brien on January 3, 2011 - 3:08pm
I disagree. There was no evidence that he had a weapon, let alone that he had any intention of raiding the school. He was after money. He got it and took off.

Locking the school down is about as useful as Duck and Cover. He could just break in through a window if it mattered that much to get in the school.

These are the kind of comments made from someone who doesn't have children. Period.

Locking the school down was not a sign of weakness. The school is just down the road and you have no idea that he did or did not have a weapon at that time.

Also...

Posted by Peter O'Brien on January 4, 2011 - 7:47am Second, if I had a kid in that school I still wouldn't want it locked down. There was no threat to the school and even if it was locked what stops him from busting a window and going in that way?

By this logic, why bother locking your door at night? I mean what's the point, right? They can just break a window and get into your house. Why bother...

Peter, you don't have kids, so your "even if I did have kids" argument is useless. Have a kid, hear that someone who just robbed a bank down the road from their school is on the loose, who may or may not have a weapon (you don't know) and then hear the principle say "We didn't do anything, because if you can't handle society's dangers, get out!"

Please. Fail.

Jan 4, 2011, 11:32am Permalink

Howard makes a great point, especially with the number of young children who walk home from that school, all towards and past the bank, since the village is completely on thee other side of the bank from the school. Plus if this guy "broke a window" to get in to the locked down school it would at the very least given the police a very good idea where to look for him. Not that that is an issue anyway since you have to be buzzed in to the school anyway. All the lockdown did was keep the kids in place and gave my son a great story that he took great interest in telling me last night. For him it was all very exciting and no damage was done to his psyche.

Jan 4, 2011, 11:35am Permalink
Thomas Mooney

I too , like Peter think it is over the top to lock up a school when it is already locked . Schools are locked except one door that is managed by the main office . So when a lock down occures it affects only one outside door and all the kids stay in class with the inside doors are locked . By the time the lock down actually happens , the suspect would have alredy entered the building , so you could actually lock in the suspect and the police would assume that the school is a safe haven and not search it .(just a plaussable scenario) don't read into this to much .

Jan 4, 2011, 12:01pm Permalink
John Roach

Tom,
There is a better than even chance a "lock down" would be in place before the guy could have gotten there.
1) We don't know if he was local
2) We don't know if he knew a school was even there
3) We don't know if he ran and hid, or got into a car
4) We don't know if he was armed or not

We do know the school is very close to the bank.
We do know that the lock down did no harm.

I could see your point if they locked down Pembroke, which is miles away, but this school is just too close to take a chance.

Jan 4, 2011, 1:07pm Permalink
Thomas Mooney

John , I agree with you but this is my point . The robbery happened at 2 PM and the lock down was at 2:15 . It would take about two minutes to get to THE Corfu School , thus meaning the suspect could already be in the school hiding . Now the lock down happens and the school gets cleared at 2:45 . Did the police search the building to absolutly rule this possibility out . I want to make this clear that this is just a scenario that could happen . I think we as community assume that because a building is in lock down that it is safe wheedn in fact it should still be search due to the closeness to the bank .

Jan 4, 2011, 1:54pm Permalink
joseph bradt

Tom, read Howards original story again. The School was not locked down at 2:15. I was listening to the scanner during this incident. The lockdown was ordered a few minutes after the robbery was reported. You can see that on Howards post at 2:07.

If the School was not locked down, and the felon walked in and caused "mahem" then you would be asking why the school WASN'T locked down. Please enlighten me, what HARM was done in locking the school down and protecting the kids?

Jan 4, 2011, 2:34pm Permalink
John Roach

Again, the lock down caused no harm. Other than nobody going in or out, there was no major disruption to the school. Everyone went home on time, and went home safe. If they had not locked down, even if nothing happened, people would have been upset who have kids there.

How many people who think the lock down was not necessary have kids at that school? Maybe we could hear from them?

Jan 4, 2011, 3:07pm Permalink
Peter O'Brien

Phil your argument by dismissal is fallacious. It assumes that because I don't have a child I don't care for the well being of children which is false.

John, it wasted resources that were not necessary.

The guy got away cleanly and based on what I have read the cops never had a whiff of where he went. So the argument being made that a guy being chased by cops would do anything is not in play since the cops were never in hot pursuit.

Jan 6, 2011, 8:12am Permalink

Authentically Local