Prosecutor says teacher framing child:
This story keeps on getting better and better…
A prosecutor on Monday said a Thurmont woman facing charges of making terroristic threats against children is trying to frame a middle school-age boy for the crimes.
Friday’s indictment links Ms. Dohm to a suspicious package sent two weeks ago to a Thurmont boy at a residence in the 100 block of Emmitsburg Road, according to Thurmont police.
Coincidentally, Thurmont police were investigating that package as detectives with the county sheriff’s office were searching Ms. Dohm’s home for handwriting samples. The April 21 search was authorized through a warrant signed the previous day.
Evidence obtained during the investigation indicates that Ms. Dohm’s intention is to set up the young boy already ruled out as a suspect for the threats, Mr. Smith said.
6 thoughts on “Michelle Dohm allegedly trying to frame child”
this woman is crazy
if she did it, then yes she is. but what ever happened to innocent until proven guilty. that seems missing in this case. where is any proof of guilt. just lots of talk about this woman attending games or not attending games. if she liked the kids and attended they’re games that makes even less sense. and what is up with fingersprints. shouldn’t there be fingersprints found somewhere.
Innocent until proven guilty only applies in a court of law. The court of public opinion is a different matter.
You’re right however, in the case of public opinion the prosecution is always going to have the upper-hand. The Grand Jury in any case only hears from the prosecution and leaks or direct “press conferences” by the prosecution go straight to the blogs and drive-by media outlets. There is little that the defense can do to stop the media machine – despite innocence or guilt. When they do try, they are usually deemed guity by default.
Tracy and JC are right… it IS unfair for us to judge without any real evidence.
But as the story is, so far… this bitch is crazy.
It would be nice (for a change) if all the allegations against her were untrue. but from what I have read so far, I have a feeling they are not.
A frederick news paper recently printed an article that quoted deputy state’s attorney Charlie Smith in court. “residents of thurmont are in fear…bomb dogs are being called to houses. people are requesting drive-bys by police to check their property.” makes one think dohm must be a pretty scary person. however, a neighbor wrote an editorial which stated how unfair it was to paint her town as so scary and that dohm was a kind and thoughtful person. Thurmont’s local paper had this to say:
Residents not living in fear:
People playing… another neighbor states she isn’t afraid of dohm…the mayor says Smith severly exaggerated…chief of police in thurmont states that they haven’t received ANY requests for drive bys…Smith corrected his statement about multiple calls for bomb dogs to say it was just one call…the article ended with Smith admitting his portrayal of a community living in fear wasn’t right.
how can this lady get a fair trial if the prosecution goes so far as to LIE in a courtroom to a judge?
makes one wonder…