Skip to main content

Law and Order: Cashier accused of stealing $1K from Walmart

By Howard B. Owens

Samantha Jane Roberts, 22, of Vine Street, Batavia, is charged with grand larceny. Roberts is accused of stealing $1,072 in cash from registers at Walmart while employed as a cashier.

Adante L. Davis, 23, of 32 Washington Ave., Batavia, is charged with disorderly conduct.  Davis allegedly made obscene gestures and used foul language directed at police officers while the officers were working in the area of West Main Street.

William C. Wurster, 52, 337 Bank Street, Apt. 70, Batavia, is charged with harassment 2nd. During a dispute with a neighbor, Wurster allegedly picked up a 2x4 and swung it around his head in a threatening manner.

Patrick Gilman Kimball, 30, of Tracy Avenue, Batavia, is charged with DWI, driving with a BAC of .08 or greater, failure to keep right and failure to dim headlights.  Kimball was stopped at 2:30 a.m., Friday, on Route 5, Pembroke, by Deputy Joseph Corona.

Andrew Charles Webster, 20, of North Street, Leicester, is charged with criminal possession of a controlled substance 7th. Webster was allegedly found in possession of Tramadol during a traffic stop at 11:47 p.m., Sunday, on Gillate Road, Alexander, by Investigator John Weis.

Curtis Paul Howden, 34, of Redman Road, Brockport, is charged with DWI, driving with a BAC of .08 or greater, unlawful possession of marijuana, drinking in a motor vehicle and failure to keep right. Howden was stopped at 12:35 a.m., Friday, on South Lake Road, Bergen, by Deputy Joseph Corona.

Kasey Ann Woodhouse, 24, of Liberty Street, Batavia, is charged with aggravated harassment 2nd. Woodhouse is accused of sending harassing messages to another person via Facebook after being told not to have contact with that person.

Robert L. Peachey, 30, of Oakfield, is charged with conspiracy 5th and grand larceny 4th, and Roy D. Hooten, 52, of Oakfield, is charged with conspiracy 5th. Peachey and Hooten were arrested by State Police for an alleged incident reported at 10:03 p.m., Saturday. No further details released.

John Simmons

I can only guess that the right to express yourself by using the Freedom of Speech right that we are guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, we all learned about in grammar school & that we used to have, has been taken away from all us citizens in these United States as I read about people being arrested for disorderly conduct & other charges for speaking their minds now.. What has this police state come too we now live in?
And isn't a charge of DWI & a Blood alcohol level if .08 really double indemnity? I am just asking here because none of the cops I know will give me a Str8 answer to that question.. Or is it just load the charges on & hope they get a conviction on one if not all of them. I do not personally drink & drive, I have only driven once when I was younger & was driving down a hill coming back from a party in Altamont, NY & I was looking at 3 sets of double solid yellow lines on the highway, then after I pulled over I literally fell out of the door & rolled under the car & I stayed there until this compassionate State Trooper helped me out from under the car about 2 hours later because I was freezing to death & asleep/passed out because it was winter time & sent me home with my wife driving. She was called from home & came to get me & was sober. I have never been charged with a DWI & never will BUT, why do these same people drive drunk time & again & get caught doing it? Or isn't the place to ask a question like this Howard?

Sep 24, 2013, 5:38am Permalink
Kyle Slocum

John, while you can express an opinion, loudly, even, you may not do so with the intent to or recklessly causing public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm. Disorderly Conduct is usually charged when a person behaves in such a way as to cause multiple calls to 911 complaining about the behavior or causes some other articulable public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm. It is a violation usually resolved by a modest fine or time served, if bail was set.

Why DWI and Operating with a BAC of .08 or higher? Because the legislature decided to write the law that way. DWI requires that the police and prosecution prove that the defendant was operating a motor vehicle upon a public roadway while intoxicated by the consumption of alcohol. BAC, alternatively, requires that the police and prosecution prove that the defendant was operating a motor vehicle on a public roadway while having a specified blood alcohol content or higher in their blood. The law then makes a presumption that the specified BAC is Prima facie evidence of intoxication.

These are two very different allegations, which end up meaning the same thing to the defendant: DWI.

Sep 24, 2013, 6:47am Permalink
Raymond Richardson

In going one step further from what Kyle stated, if you're found to be operating a motor vehicle under the influence of drugs, you wouldn't be charged with operating with a BAC of .08 or greater, unless your under the influence of both drugs and alcohol.

Sep 24, 2013, 8:30am Permalink
John Simmons

Thank you Kyle & Raymond for clarifying that for me, It seems that what I am not really concerned with, I don't know much about the specifics of the laws. Just like I always thought that the Roman numeral "M" was the symbol for 1000 like in the credits of a movie, but apparently now it is K as in the robbery at Wally World of $1,072K from cash drawers or did she really steal 1,072 Kilometers. as in a 5K race?? It just seems to me that the police blotter has more non-violent crimes associated with arrests because the State of NY needs more money & they fine everyone for just being human now.. But they also don't arrest people for not using their turn signals & they have two laws on the books about texting & holding a cellphone while driving.. If you set the cellphone down & text from that position you wouldn't be in violation of anything?? Except for being dumb, stupid, & distracted by having to take your eyes off the road to text..?

Sep 24, 2013, 5:52pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

There are more non-violent arrests because the nature of police work has changed.

Society has changed.

People are less tolerant of the perpetual malcontent.

Also, law enforcement acts under the theory now that smaller crimes lead to bigger crimes. Take care of the smaller crimes and you're less likely to deal with bigger crimes down the road.

Sep 25, 2013, 3:08pm Permalink
Kyle Slocum

Howard, while you are correct, you are out of date. Out here in the sticks, where we live decades behind the fashions and fads of our urban betters, we are still very much doing the community policing, nip it in the bud style.

The current fashion in the cities of our country is that unless there is a bleeding body on the street, all you will get is a report number for your insurance company claim. No officer will visit, no investigation of your property crime will occur.

There just isn't the budget for enough officers to actually provide police services in our cities. I hope it takes more than the usual decade or two for THAT urban fashion to visit itself upon us.

Sep 27, 2013, 8:12am Permalink

Authentically Local