Kansas Swatting Perpetrator 'SWauTistic' Interviewed on Twitter (krebsonsecurity.com) 434
"That kids house that I swatted is on the news," tweeted "SWauTistic" -- before he realized he'd gotten somebody killed. Security researcher Brian Krebs reveals what happened next.
When it became apparent that a man had been killed as a result of the swatting, Swautistic tweeted that he didn't get anyone killed because he didn't pull the trigger. Swautistic soon changed his Twitter handle to @GoredTutor36, but KrebsOnSecurity managed to obtain several weeks' worth of tweets from Swautistic before his account was renamed. Those tweets indicate that Swautistic is a serial swatter -- meaning he has claimed responsibility for a number of other recent false reports to the police. Among the recent hoaxes he's taken credit for include a false report of a bomb threat at the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that disrupted a high-profile public meeting on the net neutrality debate. Swautistic also has claimed responsibility for a hoax bomb threat that forced the evacuation of the Dallas Convention Center, and another bomb threat at a high school in Panama City, Fla, among others.
After tweeting about the incident extensively Friday afternoon, KrebsOnSecurity was contacted by someone in control of the @GoredTutor36 Twitter account. GoredTutor36 said he's been the victim of swatting attempts himself, and that this was the reason he decided to start swatting others. He said the thrill of it "comes from having to hide from police via net connections." Asked about the FCC incident, @GoredTutor36 acknowledged it was his bomb threat. "Yep. Raped em," he wrote. "Bomb threats are more fun and cooler than swats in my opinion and I should have just stuck to that," he wrote. "But I began making $ doing some swat requests."
Krebs' article also links to a police briefing with playback from the 911 call. "There is no question that police officers and first responders across the country need a great deal more training to bring the number of police shootings way down..." Krebs argues. "Also, all police officers and dispatchers need to be trained on what swatting is, how to spot the signs of a hoax, and how to minimize the risk of anyone getting harmed when responding to reports about hostage situations or bomb threats."
But he also argues that filing a false police report should be reclassified as a felony in all states.
After tweeting about the incident extensively Friday afternoon, KrebsOnSecurity was contacted by someone in control of the @GoredTutor36 Twitter account. GoredTutor36 said he's been the victim of swatting attempts himself, and that this was the reason he decided to start swatting others. He said the thrill of it "comes from having to hide from police via net connections." Asked about the FCC incident, @GoredTutor36 acknowledged it was his bomb threat. "Yep. Raped em," he wrote. "Bomb threats are more fun and cooler than swats in my opinion and I should have just stuck to that," he wrote. "But I began making $ doing some swat requests."
Krebs' article also links to a police briefing with playback from the 911 call. "There is no question that police officers and first responders across the country need a great deal more training to bring the number of police shootings way down..." Krebs argues. "Also, all police officers and dispatchers need to be trained on what swatting is, how to spot the signs of a hoax, and how to minimize the risk of anyone getting harmed when responding to reports about hostage situations or bomb threats."
But he also argues that filing a false police report should be reclassified as a felony in all states.
What an asshole (Score:5, Insightful)
"I didn't kill anyone because I didn't pull the trigger"
Wow. No, you just fooled a bunch of heavily armed people into thinking they were going to be confronting an armed and dangerous person who had already killed one person. No way could you have POSSIBLY predicted that situation could potentially lead to a death.
This idiot should be locked away for a very, very long time to think about what he did.
On a separate note - the cops need to be royally reamed. They know swatting is a thing, they know getting the address wrong is a thing... yet they roll up and without any confirmation of what's going on they shoot the guy who answers the door. FFS, no hostage-taking murderer with a gun is going to open up the front door to the police without a hostage in front of them anyway.
10:1 the shooter had bad trigger discipline. Odds are even better that what blame the cops can't avoid will be so thinly distributed that pretty much no punishment results despite the fact they killed one of the people they're charged with protecting.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow. No, you just fooled a bunch of heavily armed people into thinking they were going to be confronting an armed and dangerous person who had already killed one person. No way could you have POSSIBLY predicted that situation could potentially lead to a death. This idiot should be locked away for a very, very long time to think about what he did.
Don'y you Americans have the concept of felony murder? Not that I feel that it is universally justifiable to apply it to everything, but this seems to fit the bill.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
We do, the only question here is whether the SWAT call itself is a felony, which is likely why Krebs calls for SWAT calls to be felonies everywhere. California also has 'depraved heart murder' which seems to fit the bill.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
This actually sounds like depraved-heart murder [wikipedia.org], which the court treats as either manslaughter or second degree murder, depending on the state.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a state-by-state thing, like most US criminal law. Kansas's version is limited by statute to a specific list of "inherently dangerous felonies". Which doesn't include this case, as I understand it.
Felony murder rule is something else (Score:5, Informative)
The felony murder rule is:
When a person commits a felony, and as a result someone dies, it's murder.
A classic example would be a robbery. John and Rob plan to rob a convenience store. Rob shots the clerk. John claims "I didn't mean for anyone to get shot - I was just doing an armed robbery". John is guilty of felony murder because a) he was committing a felony and b) it resulted in death. There is a presumption that you know felonies are dangerous, and that you shouldn't commit felonies. So although John didn't WANT someone to die, he was criminally reckless by committing armed robbery, which he knew *could* result in death.
Another, perhaps more interesting example:
John and Rob plan an armed robbery of a convenience store. When they pull out their guns, an armed civilian behind them shots Rob, who later dies. John is once again guilty of felony murder. He didn't plan for Rob to die, but he did know that committing armed robbery could get someone killed.
He was murdered with malice (Score:2)
You don't SWAT someone because you are great friends with them.
Re: (Score:2)
The police officer did not know the victim, didn't wake up that day planning to kill that victim or anyone else.
I've seen video of many police shootings. They have been trained to be on a hair trigger so they can "get home alive tonight".
That training course was banned but its influence still corrupts police officers to this day.
The thing police don't realize is, the more citizens they kill- the more dangerous their job becomes.
Re: He was murdered with malice (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:What an asshole (Score:5, Informative)
The caller pretended to be the killer/hostage-taker. He also stated he'd doused the house in gasoline, which added a time-critical element to the situation (gasoline fumes can ignite on contact with many mundane heat/electric sources).
Basically the caller fed the 911 operator exactly the information needed to cause the police to abandon caution, and thus maximize the chances of the police killing someone. This was a social hack [wikipedia.org] of the 911 and police response system.
The one part of the story I'm unclear on is that 911 operators are supposed to see the phone's address (landline) or location (mobile) when they receive a call. If those didn't match the address the caller claimed this was all happening at, that should've been a red flag. I'm assuming the caller figured out a work-around to spoof his location in the 911 system. (Actually, based on the sign-up procedure for my VoIP phone numbers, I think I know how this could be done.)
Re:What an asshole (Score:5, Informative)
That includes gunfire, so surely that's another reason why the responding police should have been cautioned about not being so trigger happy before they arrived on the scene? Potentially, you're either close enough to know for sure that you won't miss which increases the chance the gun discharging would ignite any fumes directly, or far enough back that you might miss and have a ricochet do it.
I think the real takeaway here is that are multiple procedural and training failures on the side of law enforcement that need to be kept in the spotlight, rather than allowing it to focus entirely on the actions of the two gamers. A tragic mistake has already happened and that can't be changed, but there's no reason to compound that by failing to learn from it.
Re: What an asshole (Score:2)
Re: What an asshole (Score:2, Interesting)
The simplest oversight that I caught was when the dispatch operator asked him if it was a one story or two story house. The caller said it was a one-story house, but footage from the scene shows police shooting a man in the doorway of a two-story house.
Re: (Score:2)
Even better, the caller git some details wrong that would be impossible to get wrong had he actually been in the house, such as how many floors it had.
That should have been a huge red flag that either the call was a hoax or they were at the wrong address. Either case would have strongly suggested not shooting someone.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:What an asshole (Score:4, Interesting)
It doesn't lend the call any credence either.
I've never tried to talk down someone who has killed someone (or thinks they have) but I have talked down people having a psychotic break before. Also someone contemplating suicide. It's surprising how oriented they can seem to be as long as you stick to mundane things like what color is your house.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He needs to be in prison. The police directly involved probably need to be in prison.
The caller and the cop being sentenced to serve in the same cell seems appropriate.
Re: (Score:2)
If they had those little drone cameras, think how it could have turned out differently, if they could have been able to send one close to the house and asked to look round. No risk to the officer or the home owner.
Re: (Score:3)
Looks to me like the applicable charge for the shooting cop is voluntary manslaughter under Kansas law -- "Voluntary manslaughter is knowingly killing a human being committed . . . upon an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified use of deadly force . . ."
The defense would pretty much have to argue that the call made the cop's belief "reasonable" even in the absence of any confirming evidence.
Re: What an asshole (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The people that end up cops would do just fine in a criminal organization. In In the police they're paid less, but can kill citizens with impunity. What's not to like from their point of view ?
Being paid less.
Re: (Score:2)
That was a disgusting shooting, the guy basically was shot 10 rounds into a game of Simon Says. Swat teams need to consider that they are meant for shock and awe but trained and give instructions expecting calm and careful reasoning of subjects in front of them.
You can't reason with the police, they hire the bottom of the bottom of the barrel. The people that end up cops would do just fine in a criminal organization. In In the police they're paid less, but can kill citizens with impunity. What's not to like from their point of view ?
Not only that but even when fired, they're usually quickly re-hired someone else.
The Washington Post has a report on this - https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
He wasn't the one shouting. The one doing all the shouting and "Simon says" got everyone nervous. What happened to "Stand against the wall with your hands up and against the wall."?
Re: (Score:3)
CopS.
The person who designed the training. The person who signed off on this officer's fitness. The cop in charge of the scene. Whoever came up with their general response plan. AND the guy who pulled the trigger.
Believe it or not, I sympathize with the cop who killed the guy - you can bet he showed up wanting to be a hero, then one quick mistake and he's suddenly the bad guy. He killed an innocent person. If he's the least bit psychologically normal, that's going to be a heavy burden on him for the r
It's easy to second guess police... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It's easy to second guess police... (Score:5, Insightful)
The killing today in Colorado of a sheriff's deputy responding to a domestic violence call highlights the challenge faced by law enforcement officers.
A thousand cops being killed does not justify a single innocent person being killed by cops.
If they cannot do their jobs without being killed or killing innocents, it's time to replace the police. Close it down and create a new police force based on police in countries where crime is at a similar level but the death toll in police confrontations is much lower.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That makes no sense at all.We're all people- even cops. If we're innocent (police or civilian), each of our lives is worth the same. It only makes sense if you assume all cops aren't innocent.
And real-life is messy and full of errors. If you set the standard as perfection (no innocents killed), that's an unattainable standard and will result in massive costs elsewhere in the system. You can set it as a goal,
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's easy to second guess police... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes cops are people too, the problem is they aren't punished like people when they make mistakes, particularly mistakes that result in people dying. When you make the cops above the law and allow them to make these mistakes without punishment you create situations where the police shoot first and explain it later.
As in all police shootings the police reported the killed innocent reached for his waist band. Of course no weapon was found and he didn't actually reach for his waist band. Because of this a bad cop will remain on the force, a cop that shot first and killed an innocent father.
Cops need to be held responsible for their actions in the same way a doctor is held responsible when they make mistakes that result in someones death. In fact cops are about the only profession in the country where they can kill people through negligence and aren't punished for it. That's wrong and you should admit it.
Re: (Score:3)
Thatâ(TM)s nonsense. As soon as you can do your job perfectly, weâ(TM)ll be willing to take this kind of advice from you.
No one is asking for perfect.
Just that is not the worst in the entire world.
Re: (Score:2)
We do need safer ways to respond to this for all parties. But you're not offering solutions, you're just making demands.
I thought I did look for solutions by proposing that we look at other countries where this problem isn't of the same magnitude.
One big difference is that cops many places don't go armed, and need approval to remove firearms from sealed boxes in their cars.
The flip side is that criminals shoot less at the police too, because they don't feel they have to to save their lives from an armed and trigger-happy cop.
The problem of lethal weapons being used as a first resort seems solvable. The willingness to solve
Re: (Score:2)
Police in other countries don't seem to get shot quite as much, either,
At least part of that is that when the cops don't carry a gun, criminals have less incentive to shoot. They won't feel they have to in order not to get shot themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Ah yes, the "police officers have a dangerous job" excuse. You do realize that statistically speaking being a police officer doesn't even make the top 10 dangerous jobs in terms of risk to life and limb right? Garbage man, logger, farmer & fisherman are but a few of the professions that beat law enforcement when it comes to danger. I doubt very much that any people in those professions would get a pass if they killed an innocent person in a brash moment of stupidity. No one is saying that police don
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes, the "police officers have a dangerous job" excuse. You do realize that statistically speaking being a police officer doesn't even make the top 10 dangerous jobs in terms of risk to life and limb right?
You also realize that statistically speaking most of "being a police officer" involves driving around in a patrol car, sitting at a desk filling out reports, and performing traffic stops with people who are completely calm and behaving normally.
The absolute danger rate isn't relevant, the thing that matters is the danger in the specific situations that result in civilian casualties. Dangerous sounding 911 calls, people acting erratic or having trouble following instructions, etc. We don't really know those
Re: (Score:3)
Re:It's easy to second guess police... (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh, no. Police work is not all that dangerous of a job. Cops who die on the job mostly die from car accidents because they drive like idiots, or from heart attacks from all those donuts.
Re: (Score:2)
Well there, the problem was a different one. They busted in in a "dynamic entry". Over a loud disturbance call. It might have been better to knock.
Quote from Heavy Metal (Score:2)
Cops and Swatter (Score:5, Insightful)
The cop who shot and the swatter should share a general populaiton cell for 20+ years for complicity in the murder.
Swatter obviously created a dangerous situation, but this danger was exacerbated by the typical behavior of American cops.
Cops were supposed to be professionals. Instead, they were trigger-happy to save their sorry hides and murdered an innocent man. The cop who shot has blood on his hands and should never be forgiven or seen as anything but a murderer.
The emergency dispatcher who didn't ask the right questions to determine if it was a prank is also somewhat negligent. The call was to the city hall, not 9-1-1, and described a different home than where the murder took place.
Re: (Score:2)
The emergency dispatcher who didn't ask the right questions to determine if it was a prank is also somewhat negligent. The call was to the city hall, not 9-1-1, and described a different home than where the murder took place.
What sort questions? Is this a hoax? What's the name of your neighbourhood school?
Recall the 911 call came from an individual who had supposedly killed someone, was considering killing several more people, and was potentially having some kind of mental breakdown. And while we know it was a hoax know most calls like that are going to be legitimate.
Her only job was to keep him calm so he didn't finish off the rest of the family.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Nationwide, law enforcement made an estimated 12,196,959 arrests in 2012", There are approx 1000 killed by police each year. That means .00081% of arrests result in a killing
You're an order of magnitude off. .0082%
But it's also a dead wrong number. The numbers only counts fatal shootings, and only during arrest of those people. The numbers do not include "innocent bystanders, hostages, or those not in the custody of the state".
Also, the number having gone up more than tenfold in less than a decade is very troubling.
Re: (Score:2)
Throw the book at him . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
He begs to be made an example of, and it should be done pour encourager les autres.
We cannot have that in civil society.
Fatal rookie mistake by the officer... (Score:2, Insightful)
I've read of how some of the responding officers are so adrenaline filled and under trained for the high alert event that they suddenly get involved with that they get..., "over-zealous". That officer never should have had his finger on the trigger, but instead on the trigger guard. Fatal results ensue, unfortunately. Prosecute the swatter, re-train all the officers.
SWauTistic Video Interview (Score:4, Informative)
I don't like advertising this guys channel but as its relevant here is an interview a youtuber called Keemstar did with SWauTistic hours before he was arrested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:SWauTistic Video Interview (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah he was arrested right afterward. Slashdot is keeping its tradition of posting day or even week old "news".
Re: (Score:2)
I can't be mad about it. Keem basically got a full videotaped confession out of the kid.
This is just a sad state of affairs (Score:3, Insightful)
Examples are going to be made of everyone. The kid who did the Swatting. The kid who paid for the swatters services. And the unfortunate cop who pulled the trigger. 4 lives minimum, ruined.
Re:This is just a sad state of affairs (Score:5, Insightful)
And the unfortunate cop who pulled the trigger. 4 lives minimum, ruined.
The cop won't be punished. He'll be treated as a victim in this. The swatters will get good lawyers who will find some loophole in the law. The guy who answered the door is the only life that will have been ruined.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Bet you nothing happens to the cop.
Civil suit most likely will be the harshest (Score:2)
I don't think the laws are very well suited to deal with this in the harshness needed. This sort of aligns with a bartender knowingly serving someone who kills someone in a dui. No, he wasn't driving, but he certainly set things in motion.
Typically in these cases the family ends up taking them to civil court as well. I don't see the book being thrown at this guy, although the fact he seems to have done this across state lines may give the feds quite a bit more ammo.
Get away with murder. (Score:2)
2 Tell them the address of someone you don't like
3 Let them call in the police
Now the police do the murdering, the swatter gets jailed for calling the police, you walk free.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm assuming that the Secret Service (or local equivalent) will actually will get the address of the swatter before they roll, but either way it's popcorn time.
Need much harsher sentences for this (Score:2)
I'd say 100 years for starters for calling in a false threat.
The problem is you can't have police go into these things too soft either. Just today there was an incident in Colorado with a domestic disturbance where several officers (and some bystanders) got shot. So really we need to make sure that (A) if someone calls in a fake threat they WILL be caught, and (B) we punish the hell out of swatters. I'm talking "Lets bring back gladiatorial combat" level punishment since no punishment is too harsh for th
We've put the cops in an impossible situation (Score:4, Interesting)
We ask our friends and neighbors to help watch over town. As a society, we let the people arm themselves as a militia to fight the man "to not take away our freedom's", because "guns are the reason we have freedom", and all the other silly things that are said. We then ask the police to show up with kid gloves on, like somehow they have multiple lives.
If we aren't planning on violently overthrowing the government, then we should store our people killing guns at a safe community place where we all have the combination. In most countries, these places are called things like, The National Guard, or the Army. We could rename it so as to cater to those that don't like ideas that work globally to "American Armed Citizen Gun Storage for Freedom."
If we really do think that we need a violent revolution, then lets get it over with. Those that are in need, let your needs be known now, because this middle ground is killing a whole lot of innocents.
I've never seen anyone need a 15 round clip while hunting an Elk, Deer, Bear's or anything else in North America. I've never seen anyone use a hand-gun when hunting, but maybe pythons?
Our laws are so harsh in this country as it is, that everyone is an example when they get sentenced. Throwing someone in jail for 10 years or 20 years has zero rehabilitation difference if you're only considering them being a "better person" when they get out. I'd argue anything over 5 and you may as well throw away the key. Don't complain when you throw someone in jail, don't help them and then have to support them for the rest of their lives.
This kid and his friends need direct intervention. Anyone on that twitter account should receive a direct phone call from someone that sounds like authority and discuss with them why we don't do this to our fellow neighbors and friends online. That in itself would send a HUGE message...that we actually care about each other, that we treat each other appropriately and out of kindness, and that this is a large community of hundreds of millions, and that we are watching each others backs.
The kid himself needs to face some sort of sentence. He's young though, the news cycle is fast. Any "example" set by him will be quickly forgotten by the masses, only used by the court system to justify harsher sentences for everybody, people won't say "I won't do this cuz that guy got caught."
There is nothing more jolting to people that think they are getting away with things, than at least letting them know "we are paying attention to your vile behavior." Very few internet trolls would publicly do what they currently do. Outing people is a great way in terms of effectiveness and cost.
There are so many things that need to be fixed and addressed, and until they are, they're all hanging chad's in our society. Until we figure them out, these things are going to happen, people will say "more jail time", "more laws", but nothing changes when you don't change the way we deal with life.
--
Karma is a bitch
Re:We've put the cops in an impossible situation (Score:5, Interesting)
Americans had guns for more than two hundred years, but militarization of the police is a phenomenon that started with the war on drugs. Let's place blame where it belongs.
Re:We've put the cops in an impossible situation (Score:5, Informative)
The "kid" is a 25 year old man-child.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Translation: A hundred mental patients walked out of gun-shops and murdered a thousand bystanders but no-one stole my car; it's all good.
A large part of the middle ground comes from people buying guns to fight the government, not actually learning to fight the government. It's a no-responsibility required, anti-authoritarian masturbation; another way of saying "fuck you, I got mine".
In the 1960s, plenty of Americans saw they were excluded from US prosperity and protested for inclusion. The protesters rep
Re: (Score:3)
>This is nonsense. Try living elsewhere for a while and see how rosy you think it is.
Sure. Let's create a list of example countries. My list will contain every other industrialized democracy in the western world. You don't even have to go that far -- you can go to Canada.
Ignoring the Pig that Pulled the Trigger (Score:3)
Sounds Unbelievable (Score:3)
Publicly took credit for bomb threats, swatted repeatedly, has now killed a man. And he gets paid to do some of these.
It sounds like it would probably take 10 minutes to track this guy down, and like he would of been on the FBI's radar long ago.
There is a technical solution (Score:3)
Robots. Send a quadcopter. How much does it cost?
In our society we have much higher sense of human life value, that included policemen as well. Send a drone first, much closer look at the potential perp.
People portray the situation as black and white. "Pig cop killed innocent man". Watch the video. At that distance it could be that he is protecting his eyes from a high beam, but it also could be that he is preparing to shoot.
That's what this solution for - this type of uncertainty. Any further development from this situation would have decreased the uncertainty.
I suspect the solution to many our so-called political problems ("cop violence", "civilian violence") lies in the technical sphere, not in escalation of violence by incessant "occupies".
Re:There is a technical solution (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Earlier police failures... (Score:5, Insightful)
Probably didn't work out who it was.
This kids fucked. But he's *very* damn lucky Swatting isn't a felony, because Felony + Someone dies is enough to trigger a capital murder case in some states. And even if thats not the case wherever he is, theres a good chance all the cops would need is three felonies and the kid goes away for the best part of his life.
Oh, he'll be doing big time though, count on that much.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course — but why didn't they pursue him and other fookers like him?
Whether he is a "kid" or not, he should've been screwed with a splintered broomstick sideways after his very first attempt.
And now the same cruel and unusual procedure is calling for the murderous cop of the most recent incident, as well as for all those responsible for not investigating this prick's earlier crimes.
And then, of course, comes the question of why SWAT-operations are
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People don't want to pay taxes so the cops have to concentrate on crimes such as pot smoking where they can invoke civil forfeiture to make sure of getting a pay check. This also leads to the cops not wanting to spend time on money losing endeavors such as taking their time at a hostage situation when they can just shoot the perp and save time and money including court costs and of course chasing after someone on the internet has no return on the investment.
Related is the for profit prison industry, needed
Re:Earlier police failures... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Federal case -- call from LA (Score:3)
By other reports, swatter was in LA, CA and made interstate phone call to Kansas. Very likely committed several US Federal felonies (wire fraud, phone phreaking, making terroristic threat) that will trigger Federal Felony Murder. Kansas statute is far more limited. Rare for the Feds to go for the death penalty, but it is probably available.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect there may be a change in some laws as a result of this incident. A swatting "prank", IMO, should be reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, a felony charge.
Re: Earlier police failures... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Earlier police failures... (Score:5, Informative)
That's because it is. In fact, to quote the US government's own National Institute of Justice, and confirmed by a fair bit of research, "The certainty of being caught is a vastly more powerful deterrent than the punishment." It's not the severity of the penalty, but the likelihood of it occurring.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, I do agree about that. It probably does do some good to send a message that this is not funny, but some amoral shit that we won't put up with. Then focus on catching a high percentage of those who try this in the future, whatever he winds up getting.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
But they are all stupid, because they don't permit their citizens to just walk around with AK47s whenever they want. Their citizens are being slaughtered by the millions and the gov't just lets it happen.
I read it on Breitbart, so it must be true. And Trump retweeted it. Fact!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
IANAL, but I think the GP post is confusing "accessory after the fact" (e.g. helping to hide the body) with some other legal ideas like "strict liability" and/or the "felony murder rule" and/or several other things.
would it mean that he can't be charged if the cop is not charged too?
I don't think that would make a difference. If you commit a felony, and it was reasonably foreseeable that someone would die as a result, and someone does die as a result, that's murder. Other factors - if it was an accident, a lawful killing (law enforcement or self defense) - are completely irr
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Gee. Makes you kinda think twice about launching a career as a getaway driver. Sheesh. Now what do I do after I graduate?
As long as you do your job right, surely it doesn't matter.
Re: Earlier police failures... (Score:3)
The problem would be that this is a SWAT team, the 911 call already stated that someone is already dead or close to it (the callers dad), also the only other people in the house should be female, which leads to a situation where it is reasonable to assume the person I front of them is armed.
Some post mortem analysis says the police should have noticed that the person answering the door didn't have a phone in their hand while they were supposedly on the phone with 911, but I would be surprised if that kind o
Re: (Score:2)
From what I read elsewhere, the kid has been prosecuted and has spent time in jail.
I get the impression, he may not be perfectly mentally healthy.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, score another one for police — why was not the fake caller prosecuted after his very first crime?
He's probably using one or more proxies, if you have a decent amount of technical know how you can make yourself pretty difficult to track down. If you manage use TOR on top of it I'm not sure you're getting caught unless the NSA gets interested.
Of course, that's assuming he hasn't left any clues elsewhere. The money has to get into his hands at some point and his tweets and previous SWATs probably left some clues.
And if he was being truthful that he was a victim of swatting, and that people in his personal
Re: (Score:3)
Well, he's been found and arrested already [sophos.com] — so much for the "pretty difficult". Police should've shown the same vigor before his actions resulted in a death.
In denial much? Open any article on the subject and browse the comments. For example, from here [arstechnica.com]:
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, score another one for police — why was not the fake caller prosecuted after his very first crime?
Score two for the police. In virtually no other modern western country would the cops have immediately shot a person for just opening the front door. Competent police would seek to contain the situation until they worked out what was going on, get a negotiator, trained snipers etc. Of course the guy in the door was black so never let a chance go by.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Well, score another one for police — why was not the fake caller prosecuted after his very first crime?
Score two for the police. In virtually no other modern western country would the cops have immediately shot a person for just opening the front door. Competent police would seek to contain the situation until they worked out what was going on, get a negotiator, trained snipers etc. Of course the guy in the door was black so never let a chance go by.
Uh...no, the guy wasn't black. His name was Andrew Finch, and he was pasty white.
Which is also why there are no SJWs screaming that this was a racially motivated killing. But they should, just to reinforce how ridiculous those kind of claims are.
Re: (Score:2)
How is calling people who are there to protect other people a crime?
That'd be legally acknowledging that you are safer by not engaging with LEOs at all.
Avoiding all contact with American cops DOES keep you safe. US Cops are criminals with badges.
Re: Earlier police failures... (Score:3)
How is calling people who are there to protect other people a crime?
It isn't, unless you know there's nothing they need to protect anyone from. At the very least that's filing a false police report (which is in fact a crime), and besides that, it's abuse of the state apparatus to commit assault (and sometimes worse) for you. In cases like this, the caller should be held criminally liable for any harm or death that occurs, and the abuse of police resources should be counted as an aggravating factor.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Nothing was done because law enforcement doesn't take SWATing seriously. It's just a "prank". Local police won't do anything, if they even can. The FBI just dumps your SWATing complains into the nearest dumpster - they're far more concerned with credit card fraud.
Maybe now that someone has died, police will realize this is a thing, that it is dangerous, and that the perpetrators need to have their asses kicked HARD.
I don't think it works like that. Crimes like this are reported to and investigated by local police. The FBI only becomes involved if the crime involves activities that cross state lines or if local police requests their involvements or use of FBI resources. It's only in movies where the FBI shows up, takes over an investigation and sidelines local police. Usually relations between the FBI and local police are quite cooperative in nature. If swatting reports get dumped in the trash by anybody it's local pol
Re: (Score:2)
The swatter was in LA, the swatting was in Kansas. So state lines were crossed.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
> What on earth were the founders thinking?
They were thinking of agrarian society, and hence they came up with the electoral college, which is ridiculously outdated now but we still have it.
Re: Earlier police failures... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here is how this thing will play out. The prosecutor will offer a plea deal and this guy will get probation. Reasons will include sketchy evidence and trying to show this to an elderly judge whose never touched a computer or much less knows what VoIP is. Cop will get a month vacation and the full backing of the police union. Hell they couldn't even fire the cops who gave Jeffrey Dahmer's drugged naked and underage victim back to be murdered.
Also the shooting of australian Justine Damond (Score:2)
In Australia, you don't expect the cops to shoot you, hence her unfortunate misplacement of trust.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]