FARMINGTON — The state has dismissed an aggravated trafficking in methamphetamine charge against a Washington Township man for insufficient evidence, according to a document filed in District Court.
The document was signed by Assistant Attorney General David Fisher. No further information was available Tuesday.
A Maine Drug Enforcement agent arrested Robin Cobb, 46, on Aug. 21 after two packages containing about 2 kilograms of a powdery white substance arrived at the Wilton Post Office for him.
When Cobb arrived to pick up the packages addressed to him from Chino, California, he was taken into custody by postal inspectors and investigators from the Maine Drug Enforcement Agency.
Cobb told investigators the packages contained isopropylbenzylamine, a legal substance, which he uses to clean headlights for other people. He told police he pays about $150 for a kilogram of the substance, ordering it online.
The agency had been investigating Cobb after receiving information from police and a cooperating person that Cobb was involved in manufacturing and selling methamphetamine. The latter person, who was found to be in possession of 49 grams of methamphetamine, told an agent Cobb was allegedly receiving packages of methamphetamine in the mail, according to a court affidavit.
The agency alerted a U.S. Postal Service inspector about the impending delivery. The packages arrived on different days in August. A Maine State Police dog alerted officers to the presence of illegal drugs in both packages, according to a court document.
According to the affidavit: The inspector was granted a federal search warrant and opened the packages. A narcotics test kit was used to test the substance in both packages. Both received a presumptive positive result for methamphetamine. The packages were resealed. A drug agent also used a test kit on the powdery white substance in one of the packages, which came back with a presumptive positive result.
The contents of both packages were sent to a state testing laboratory for further analysis.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less