Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
But for the fact that this "prankster" called the police, the victim would still be alive.
Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
But for the fact that this "prankster" called the police, the victim would still be alive.
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
But for the fact that this "prankster" called the police, the victim would still be alive.
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
When you hire a hitman, you are found guilty of first degree murder, despite not being there or committing the act yourself.
Swatting where someone dies is a direct analog to that classification of murder where it could very well meet the standards of being equivalent to manslaughter, by association.
Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
But for the fact that this "prankster" called the police, the victim would still be alive.
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
When you hire a hitman, you are found guilty of first degree murder, despite not being there or committing the act yourself.
Swatting where someone dies is a direct analog to that classification of murder where it could very well meet the standards of being equivalent to manslaughter, by association.
Hiring a hitman is contracted and intentional, this isn't. There is no real comparsion. And I don't know about any association-related manslaughter laws so wich situations are you talking about here?
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
When you hire a hitman, you are found guilty of first degree murder, despite not being there or committing the act yourself. Swatting where someone dies is a direct analog to that classification of murder where it could very well meet the standards of being equivalent to manslaughter, by association.
Hiring a hitman is contracted and intentional, this isn't. There is no real comparsion. And I don't know about any association-related manslaughter laws so wich situations are you talking about here?
I'm just saying it won't surprise me, at all, if they are able to make that sort of legal connection, where manslaughter can occur via a 3rd party similar to how first degree murder can.
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
When you hire a hitman, you are found guilty of first degree murder, despite not being there or committing the act yourself. Swatting where someone dies is a direct analog to that classification of murder where it could very well meet the standards of being equivalent to manslaughter, by association.
Hiring a hitman is contracted and intentional, this isn't. There is no real comparsion. And I don't know about any association-related manslaughter laws so wich situations are you talking about here?
I'm just saying it won't surprise me, at all, if they are able to make that sort of legal connection, where manslaughter can occur via a 3rd party similar to how first degree murder can.
Minimally, it should be an easy open and shut case of negligent or involuntary manslaughter. It could possibly set a precedent for something else, too.
My guess is at least two of the accused will try and possibly reach a deal with the prosecutor. Apparently the maximum penalty for making false reports that result in death is life in prison and a fine of $250,000.
It will be interesting to see how this case unfolds. Kansas is a fairly conservative state, they probably have no qualms about putting Tyler Barriss away for a long time, although I sincerely doubt he will get life.
I think people responsible for this need to get extremley lengthy jail sentences, that's the only thing that will make them think twice before pulling such shit.
My guess is at least two of the accused will try and possibly reach a deal with the prosecutor. Apparently the maximum penalty for making false reports that result in death is life in prison and a fine of $250,000.
It will be interesting to see how this case unfolds. Kansas is a fairly conservative state, they probably have no qualms about putting Tyler Barriss away for a long time, although I sincerely doubt he will get life.
I think people responsible for this need to get extremley lengthy jail sentences, that's the only thing that will make them think twice before pulling such shit.
Interesting, so this is a state case?
Hopefully he will then be charged for all the other calls that he has made. I agree the law for false reports needs to be stronger.
So, apparently this whole thing started because of a dispute over a $1.50 bet. HOW PATHETIC! Now the guy is getting 20 years at least. Is that justice? Don't know, but I really hope rules are put in place so that anyone that tries this shite will spend at minimum some years in jail, and a hefty hefty fine...
^Good, he deserves more IMO. Because of something so stupid, an innocent person is dead. I could of sworn the other guys he was arguing with were also in trouble since they gave a fake address which ended up being the house of the guy who got killed and were instigating it. Wonder if they will get any time?
I hope the officer that shot him at least got proper training and an evaluation, the ball was dropped badly on this one by law enforcement.
Just a tragic situation all around. 5 lives ruined over a video game. Hopefully this will be an example for others.....
Perhaps swatting will be taken more seriously now that this scumbag is going to prision for this. It's disheartening to know that people do this because video games...
Comments
Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
But for the fact that this "prankster" called the police, the victim would still be alive.
Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
But for the fact that this "prankster" called the police, the victim would still be alive.
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
But for the fact that this "prankster" called the police, the victim would still be alive.
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
When you hire a hitman, you are found guilty of first degree murder, despite not being there or committing the act yourself.
Swatting where someone dies is a direct analog to that classification of murder where it could very well meet the standards of being equivalent to manslaughter, by association.
Charge that fucking scumbag with manslaughter and give him a life sentence.
Maybe that will show all the other shitheads that there are real life consenquences.
I would say the connection to manslaughter is still too indirect/circumstantial for it to justifiably qualify as manslaughter... not "hands on" enough. If there was a paragraph "manslaughter through third party by negligance" or something like that it would be all good to sentence through that but bending interpretations to fit a desired outcome isn't really what courtrooms should be doing.
it's a very strange limbo between prank and death this case is stuck in. Technically he's still just a prankster (albeit severe) and yet also something more than that at the same time.
You basically just described manslaughter... It's different from murder, which is why it has it's own word.
I know what it is but you're still physically there. This is a prank at it's core, with the actual deed done by somebody else. For these reasons i think it's a stretch defining it as manslaughter.
But for the fact that this "prankster" called the police, the victim would still be alive.
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
When you hire a hitman, you are found guilty of first degree murder, despite not being there or committing the act yourself.
Swatting where someone dies is a direct analog to that classification of murder where it could very well meet the standards of being equivalent to manslaughter, by association.
Hiring a hitman is contracted and intentional, this isn't. There is no real comparsion. And I don't know about any association-related manslaughter laws so wich situations are you talking about here?
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
When you hire a hitman, you are found guilty of first degree murder, despite not being there or committing the act yourself. Swatting where someone dies is a direct analog to that classification of murder where it could very well meet the standards of being equivalent to manslaughter, by association.
Hiring a hitman is contracted and intentional, this isn't. There is no real comparsion. And I don't know about any association-related manslaughter laws so wich situations are you talking about here?
I'm just saying it won't surprise me, at all, if they are able to make that sort of legal connection, where manslaughter can occur via a 3rd party similar to how first degree murder can.
Yeah that's true. But It's still a juridical "limbo" type of situation where nothing substantial really sticks despite the actual outcome.
When you hire a hitman, you are found guilty of first degree murder, despite not being there or committing the act yourself. Swatting where someone dies is a direct analog to that classification of murder where it could very well meet the standards of being equivalent to manslaughter, by association.
Hiring a hitman is contracted and intentional, this isn't. There is no real comparsion. And I don't know about any association-related manslaughter laws so wich situations are you talking about here?
I'm just saying it won't surprise me, at all, if they are able to make that sort of legal connection, where manslaughter can occur via a 3rd party similar to how first degree murder can.
Minimally, it should be an easy open and shut case of negligent or involuntary manslaughter. It could possibly set a precedent for something else, too.
https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/involuntary-manslaughter-overview.html
It will be interesting to see how this case unfolds. Kansas is a fairly conservative state, they probably have no qualms about putting Tyler Barriss away for a long time, although I sincerely doubt he will get life.
Oh, and a Parkland survivor was swatted
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/05/us/hogg-family-home-swatting-incident-trnd/index.html
I think people responsible for this need to get extremley lengthy jail sentences, that's the only thing that will make them think twice before pulling such shit.
My guess is at least two of the accused will try and possibly reach a deal with the prosecutor. Apparently the maximum penalty for making false reports that result in death is life in prison and a fine of $250,000.
It will be interesting to see how this case unfolds. Kansas is a fairly conservative state, they probably have no qualms about putting Tyler Barriss away for a long time, although I sincerely doubt he will get life.
Oh, and a Parkland survivor was swatted
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/05/us...
I think people responsible for this need to get extremley lengthy jail sentences, that's the only thing that will make them think twice before pulling such shit.
Interesting, so this is a state case?
Hopefully he will then be charged for all the other calls that he has made. I agree the law for false reports needs to be stronger.
https://apnews.com/b56b4fc4e5c64db7b4ed31c523accc2c
So, apparently this whole thing started because of a dispute over a $1.50 bet. HOW PATHETIC! Now the guy is getting 20 years at least. Is that justice? Don't know, but I really hope rules are put in place so that anyone that tries this shite will spend at minimum some years in jail, and a hefty hefty fine...
I hope the officer that shot him at least got proper training and an evaluation, the ball was dropped badly on this one by law enforcement.
Just a tragic situation all around. 5 lives ruined over a video game. Hopefully this will be an example for others.....
https://www.foxnews.com/us/california-man-sentenced-to-20-years-for-fatal-swatting-of-kansas-man