Woman pleads guilty to buying heroin near infant

With two previous felony convictions, Norwalk resident could face six to 18 months in prison when she is sentenced.
Cary Ashby
Nov 27, 2012


A local woman pleaded guilty Monday to buying heroin in the vicinity of an 18-month-old child.

Brooke A. Turner, 27, of 61 Spino Court, was convicted Monday of one count of trafficking in heroin in the vicinity of a juvenile. She also agreed to reimburse the Norwalk Police Department the cost of drug testing as part of a plea deal.

Also, Huron County Assistant Prosecutor Dina Shenker agreed to dismiss two other charges of trafficking in heroin and one count of possession of criminal tools.

The controlled March 11 purchase happened on West Chestnut Street. Shenker said a wired confidential informant gave Turner $25 and Turner received a baggie with brown powder that tests later confirmed was heroin.

"This transaction happened in the vicinity of a juvenile," Shenker also told the court.

Norwalk Police Detective Sgt. Jim Fulton, after the hearing, said the transaction was set up without the knowledge that a child would be there.

"We don't let informants take their children on drug buys. There was a child present at the residence during the buy, but it wasn't the informant's," Detective Sgt. Seth Fry said.

Turner, after hearing the prosecutor's assessment of the case, disputed there was a child present.

"When I heard the tapes, I never heard a child. I never did it in front of a child," Turner told Huron County Common Pleas Judge Jim Conway.

Huron County Public Defender David Longo explained to his client a child only has to be present, but not seen, for defendants to be charged with selling drugs in the vicinity of a juvenile. Turner then said she understood and agreed the prosecutor's presentation of the facts was accurate.

With two local felony convictions from separate 2004 cases, Turner could face six to 18 months in prison when she is sentenced Jan. 9.

She remains free on bond.



Im really confused by this article. It says turner gave a wired confidential informant $25 in exchange for heroin, and that this informant had a child with them. So does this mean that the police are giving heroin to informants that have children and having them present in front known drug addicts. Im just confused on how this whole operation went down.

Cary Ashby

It means the infant was in the residence where the transaction took place, but Turner didn't see or hear the child. That's what she expressed confusion about during Monday's hearing before she entered her plea.


Thats what i understood. I guess i should have said that i was confused by the choice of the police and not the article. sorry.


And also how is she being charged with selling heroin when in the article she is the one buying the heroin. So maybe i was confused by the article a little bit.

Cary Ashby

I understand your confusion — it's confusing for me, too. But the person who is buying from the informant is charged with trafficking in drugs. Either way, authorities consider it dealing drugs.


I got ya. Thanks


M-ville, that's what I got from it too. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad she got caught, but to me that's like hiding a bunch of 5-year-olds in a closet and inviting a pedophile on probation over, then charging him with violating probation for being within x number of feet of a minor. Makes no sense.

Second Opinion

Anyone else think that this is a form of entrapment, get a person to commit a crime while a child who can't be seen is present.

I think the Sheriff's department should investigate this to see if any crimes were committed with the Norwalk Police endangering this youth. Why was this youth USED for ANY drug deal? Many times they go bad and end up in shootings.

Sitting In The ...

They won't investigate things that happen within their own department what makes you think they will do it for someone else?


Yes I agree..giving an informant heroin with a child nearby knowing a convicted felon is coming over is stupid and dangerous. She probably could of been caught very easily another way. Doesn't look like she is that picky on purchasing heroin. NPD should be investigated.


happens all the time ! back in 1986 an informant sat and helped bag up 5ozs of coke,packed his nose ( which you could hear on the tape )got high as h-ll and no charges against him, plus got paid by norwalk pd... must be nice to get them kind of benefits.. WOW !

Second Opinion

are you certain of this Mike? If this is true, I'm disgusted to no end.
If this is true then the NPD along with any other police agency needs to be charged with a crime. Committing a crime to arrest offenders is never justifiable. It would be nice to find an article which substantiates your post.


second opinion, i'm very sure cause it was me that got busted & the tape was in my discovery,Russ Leffler was my lawyer at the time. i was in my 20's back then young & dumb.. i even ask MR. Leffler they can get paid to get high and then bust people ? his reply was.. it seems like it ! after i was sent to mansfield prison the informant got in trouble again & worked for the npd again as not to go to prison himself..

Second Opinion

If the report is correct, this should go national so other children won't be used for the cops convinces. Who would EVER submit a child to this danger? Gesh, I can't believe this!


I am not sure exactly who the criminal is in this case!


IMO, reads like entrapment.

The U.S. prison system needs more inmates for its work camps.

So remember: If someone comes to you and asks you to hold some money or an item for them, it could be "construed" as drug money or purchased with drug money and off to prison you go.

Mens rea (intent) is increasingly not needed for federal crimes.

"Today there are an estimated 4,500 crimes in federal statutes, plus thousands more embedded in federal regulations,"


Trust no one and suspect everyone.

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they're not out to get you. :)

Lloyd Christmas

It says "Turner gave a wired confidential informant $25 and received a baggie with brown powder that tests later confirmed was heroin." but the title of this article is "Woman pleads guilty to selling heroin near infant". Turner wasnt the one selling it, she was the one buying it. The police department & informant should be the one charged with the sale. lol




Who cares. She bought drugs and got busted. Too bad it's not three strikes and you are out for life here. Keep the pos's off of the streets if you ask me.


I too am confused by this article, for MANY reasons... buying or selling, still deserves a punishment but it clearly states "Shenker said Turner gave a wired confidential informant $25 and received a baggie with brown powder that tests later confirmed was heroin." but the headline reads she SOLD, not bought. Which is it? Like I said, either should be punishable and most importantly is the fact that the child was there with NPD's knowledge. Wrong on so many levels!


Even during Prohibition, the selling and manufacturing of alcohol was a crime; drinking was not.

The govt. tended to target the source; not the user.

Cary Ashby

There has been a lot of confusion about the child. IT WASN'T THE INFORMANT'S CHILD — that was my mistake. Plain and simple. Read the quote I added from Norwalk Police Detective Sgt. Seth Fry, which should clear up the situation.

Second Opinion

Thanks for the clarification

Lloyd Christmas

Ok, well still... your article is still wrong. Did she buy or sell? Title says sold, story says bought. Come on Rook!

Ellis dee

I wanna shoot up with her


me first! wait your turn.


inept reporting strikes again!!


Cary I think Clark kent would be very disappointed in your article here. Peter Parker would be too but he is just a photographer. Put your articles together better! Make sure they make sense!

Sitting In The ...

The first thing this woman should of done was fired Longo, then told the judge she plead not guilty. You could of shredded their credibility I mean come on an ex-used car salesman set up a "controlled" buy then charges you with a crime but doesn't provide one shred of evidence.


Who cares who the child belonged too. An informant should never have gone to a house with children present to conduct a drug sale for the police. The police should set up a better time and place then to put children in a situation like that period!