FirstAlerts

Two Charged in Theft of Veterans' Memorial Plaques from Hancock County Cemeteries

Steve Berry and Ronald Verdon face charges in connection with the alleged theft of veterans' memorial plaques from gravesites in Hancock County. The case remains undecided.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Sep 2, 2026, 12:19 p.m. ETWritten Sep 9, 2026, 1:08 a.m. ET
Two men have been in connection with the theft of veterans' memorial plaques from gravesites in Hancock County, according to wxxv25.com. The charges were announced on September 2, 2026. Steve Berry faces three counts of grand larceny and two counts of receiving stolen property, while Ronald Verdon faces charges related to receiving stolen property, as reported by wxxv25.com. The government alleges that Berry stole plaques from gravesites at three cemeteries in Hancock County, and that Verdon received stolen property. The case is at the charging stage and has not been resolved. The defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the allegations remain undecided. Further details have not been established.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 19 Sept 2026, 05:08current

    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.