Bond Set for Hattiesburg Shooting Suspect Charged With Aggravated Assault
Laron Jordan, 31, of Hattiesburg, faces an aggravated assault charge and a listed parole violation after a person was shot in the arm near restaurants on North 25th Avenue, according to wdam.com.
3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 9, 2026, 12:43 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 10, 2026, 12:33 a.m. ET
Laron Jordan Charged With Aggravated Assault in Hattiesburg
Laron Jordan, 31, of Hattiesburg, has been charged with aggravated assault, according to wdam.com. The charge is an accusation, and Jordan is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. The case remains undecided.
The Hattiesburg Police Department investigated the case, according to wdam.com. The proceeding remains at the charged stage.
The available reports do not establish the date of the alleged conduct or any further details of the accusation.
Sep 9, 2026, 12:43 a.m. ETFirst report
Hattiesburg Man Charged With Aggravated Assault in Shooting Near Restaurants
A Hattiesburg man has been charged with aggravated assault following a shooting near restaurants on North 25th Avenue, according to wdam.com. The incident occurred on September 9, 2026, and police say a person was injured.
Laron Jordan, 31, of Hattiesburg, is charged with aggravated assault, as reported by wdam.com. The government claims Jordan shot a person in the arm during an altercation near the restaurants. The charges are allegations, and Jordan is presumed innocent until proven guilty. This matter is only at the charging stage and has not been resolved in court.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 210 Sept 2026, 04:37current
Added that bond has been set and a parole violation is listed, per wdam.com; retained the sourced range on the shooting accounts and the presumption of innocence.
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 04:52
First published.
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 04:43current
First published.
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 04:33current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.