Swatting results in death of innocent man, Kansas.

[Kellhound]

Again, this is directly refuted by kansas statute. There doesn't need to be any intent for 2nd degree murder. I've already linked the statute twice in this thread.

- - - Updated - - -



This varies by state, and in kansas, 2nd degree murder does not require intent.

Simple solution going forward, make any false police report that results in police being dispatched to a location a federal offense of 1st Degree Attempted Murder (one count for every person at the location), with any death resulting from it being 1st Degree Murder.

[Gaaz]

Actually in the US the chance that you will be shot by the police even when unarmed is a well known issue, and the risk that a swatting has the potential to end in a death has been widely discussed over they years, so no, you cannot easily claim that he failed to show extreme indifference to life. And it has nothing to do with what you expect to happen, it is what a reasonable person would expect. A reasonable person in the US would agree that intentionally having the police show up expecting an armed and dangerous person has a very high likelihood of resulting in deadly force being used.

I think it is too far fetched. Sure, in the US there is a higher probability of someone getting shot by police. But nevertheless, one should not reasonably expect for police to go trigger happy at the first sight of something potentially wrong. After all, they are supposed to be professionals. It might have been a hostage opening the door, which is frequently the case. I do not have detailed statistics on that matter, but from the top of my head, from cases I can remember from news, more often than not a hostage is the first person to open the door in these situations. Either acting as a shield or as a messenger. You are not sending a boy who is almost catatonic with fear and pisses his pants non stop to breach the door. You are sending in a pro. Otherwise, I have no idea what sort of training do your SWAT teams get. Because if they start shooting at the first chance they get, they are little more than doped up gangsters in the government employ. I hope that is not the case. A reasonable person would expect for SWAT team to get in, make everyone else shit their pants and get out. Not the other way round.
Also, there have been extreme breeches in military conduct in this case (police conduct), but that is perhaps not on the shooter and the prankster, but on a person who directed this operation. Police must asses the situation, inspect everything there is to inspect and announce themselves if there is anything that is not clear. Sending in the hit squad with no intel or cover is beyond stupid. What if the place was wired? The way they did it would not even pass in Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan as an adequately planned military operation. I know it would not have passed in Abkhazia during the Georgian war. If there would have been civilian or your own losses during a similarly planned operation when I was there (though I was in the marine tech, not ground operations), the one who planned it would have been court marshaled. You are required to give operations plan for inspection in these cases. If there is none, or it involves 2 bullet points similar to "break the door" and "kill someone", you would be royally screwed. Basically - this is not normal even for combat units in a military zone. I would think that police would be more used to dealing with civilians to show a little more restraint. "Going in hot, blind, no plan or intel and shooting everything that gets in the crosshair" is something from the WW2 enemy bunker busting, not police arsenal.

[Kellhound]

I think it is too far fetched. Sure, in the US there is a higher probability of someone getting shot by police. But nevertheless, one should not reasonably expect for police to go trigger happy at the first sight of something potentially wrong. After all, they are supposed to be professionals. It might have been a hostage opening the door, which is frequently the case. I do not have detailed statistics on that matter, but from the top of my head, from cases I can remember from news, more often than not a hostage is the first person to open the door in these situations. Either acting as a shield or as a messenger. You are not sending a boy who is almost catatonic with fear and pisses his pants non stop to breach the door. You are sending in a pro. Otherwise, I have no idea what sort of training do your SWAT teams get. Because if they start shooting at the first chance they get, they are little more than doped up gangsters in the government employ. I hope that is not the case. A reasonable person would expect for SWAT team to get in, make everyone else shit their pants and get out. Not the other way round.
Also, there have been extreme breeches in military conduct in this case (police conduct), but that is perhaps not on the shooter and the prankster, but on a person who directed this operation. Police must asses the situation, inspect everything there is to inspect and announce themselves if there is anything that is not clear. Sending in the hit squad with no intel or cover is beyond stupid. What if the place was wired? The way they did it would not even pass in Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan as an adequately planned military operation. I know it would not have passed in Abkhazia during the Georgian war. If there would have been civilian or your own losses during a similarly planned operation when I was there (though I was in the marine tech, not ground operations), the one who planned it would have been court marshaled. You are required to give operations plan for inspection in these cases. If there is none, or it involves 2 bullet points similar to "break the door" and "kill someone", you would be royally screwed. Basically - this is not normal even for combat units in a military zone. I would think that police would be more used to dealing with civilians to show a little more restraint. "Going in hot, blind, no plan or intel and shooting everything that gets in the crosshair" is something from the WW2 enemy bunker busting, not police arsenal.

That shows an extreme indifference to the value of human life as they knew it was a possibility that the call-out would result in a shooting, but did it anyway.

[Gaaz]

That shows an extreme indifference to the value of human life as they knew it was a possibility that the call-out would result in a shooting, but did it anyway.

There is a probability that a call to pizza delivery (a prank call possibly) would result in a pizza guy crashing and killing himself and / or other people. Prank pizza calls are still not classified as 2nd degree murders. There is no way a non biased court would fall for 2nd degree here. Especially it being one of only 2 violent cases over the last 50 years of SWATting pranks practice, the other being a policeman getting wounded by an unsuspecting home owner.

[Gorsameth]

There is a probability that a call to pizza delivery (a prank call possibly) would result in a pizza guy crashing and killing himself and / or other people. Prank pizza calls are still not classified as 2nd degree murders. There is no way a non biased court would fall for 2nd degree here. Especially it being one of only 2 violent cases over the last 50 years of SWATting pranks practice, the other being a policeman getting wounded by an unsuspecting home owner.

Intent to cause harm.

The difference between a pizza delivery and swatting.
And between an unfortunate accident and 2nd degree murder

[Gaaz]

Intent to cause harm.

The difference between a pizza delivery and swatting.
And between an unfortunate accident and 2nd degree murder

There was no intent to cause harm. As I said, in over 50 years of prank practice this was the only case when harm came to a victim of SWATting. There were no situations recorded anywhere in the world that led to a SWATing victim not only being shot, but even injured in any form. An intent to cause harm would look more like for example tying the guy up in a threatening pose, putting a shotgun in his hands, aiming it at the door and when the police arrive - playing several shot recordings over decent speakers to provoke the police into charging the scene. Naturally you would reasonably expect for police to react to a shotgun pointed at them. Here, physical harm was not expected by anyone.

[xenogear3]

There is a probability that a call to pizza delivery (a prank call possibly) would result in a pizza guy crashing and killing himself and / or other people. Prank pizza calls are still not classified as 2nd degree murders. There is no way a non biased court would fall for 2nd degree here. Especially it being one of only 2 violent cases over the last 50 years of SWATting pranks practice, the other being a policeman getting wounded by an unsuspecting home owner.

There are plenty of pizza delivery pranks.
I cannot believe that anyone wants that job.

Cop only kills black ..., no, I mean when you and the bad cop are alone.
After you dead, it is cop's word against a dead person.

SWAP should not happy trigger.
Everything is recorded.

[Azadina]

You think the hostage taker would just answer the door himself leaving his hostages behind?
How would that person continue to hold his hostages hostage while being at the front door in plain view and unarmed?
Do you think before you type?
If that was a real hostage situation it would have been one of the hostages opening the door while held at gunpoint from out of view.
Good job gunning them down, I guess it is one of the fastest way to "resolve" a hostage situation, just throwing a couple grenades through the windows might be faster.

Do you think before you type? Alleged male hostage taker, has murdered the father, holds mother and sister hostage, has poured gasoline all over the house. What exactly do you think is left to conclude, when the only male supposedly alive, aka, the "hostage taker" comes to the door? Who exactly else would that man be in the scenario? The mother perhaps? Pretty easy calculation, don't you think. 2 males, minus one dead, means male showing at the door would be the one who murdered the other.

Speaking of grenades: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...o-disciplinary

Why do you expect local police to perform better, when seal team grenades hostages?

[Mormolyce]

On the legal side, these guys definitely committed a crime. I believe federal. I think it's conspiracy to commit fraud, unauthorised access etc. Has a very low prosecution rate though. There have been several recent attempts to increase sentencing on it but I don't know if they were successful.

As for murder, I dunno maybe a court could rule manslaughter?

[Ripster42]

That shows an extreme indifference to the value of human life as they knew it was a possibility that the call-out would result in a shooting, but did it anyway.

Eh, if he'd called it to the right house I'd consider it just reckless indifference to the value of human life (manslaughter). Calling it on the wrong house elevated it to extreme indifference to human life (2nd degree murder prerequisite).

[Easo]

Do you have any clue at all as to what actually happened?

Do you? Or don't you get the point - it is too easy to call SWAT team, without confirmation that it is actually required.

- - - Updated - - -

WTF is wrong with you?

Of course they would act on this information. They'd get crucified if they didn't.

What land of rainbow and sunshine do you come from where the cops just don't bother responding to a report of such a situation? They got told one was dead, several people were being held hostage by a person who called 911 and said they refused to disarm, that the house was doused with petrol and they were debating setting it on fire. There is not a police service in the world that wouldn't send an armed response to the situation.

WTF is wrong with you? Send a standard patrol, confirm that there is actually a threat and then involve SWAT. Do you really not see how easily it is to abuse the system? Well, we just got one corpse, so I guess you do not.

[Krastyn]

Do you? Or don't you get the point - it is too easy to call SWAT team, without confirmation that it is actually required.

So no, you don't. There was no actual SWAT team there. There was an emergency response from the local police in the area.

I guess you would prefer if they just responded to the call whenever they had time with a single call because everyone who calls 911 could be faking it so don't take it seriously. Treating every call as possibly fake is a great way to end up with more dead people.

When a fire alarm goes off in a building should people just continue on with what they are doing until they actually see evidence of a fire because some prankster could have just pulled the alarm? Or should people take it seriously and leave and then press charges against a prankster if it was?

[Halicia]

If he responded appropriately...then why was he the only one that shot? That would mean the other officers present did not respond appropriately. Are they the fuck ups?

Yes, they are.

You don't send the bomb squad to defuse a bomb and then expect them NOT to look for bombs. This is a SWAT team that was sent to take down a killer and save the children. If multiple officers failed to do that, then they were !@#$ups, or recognized that the situation had been secured.

This isn't some "routine traffic stop", this is a SWAT team responding to shots fired and dead bodies already. If there is collateral damage or friendly fire due to the total failure to verify the information they were being sent out on, the fault wasn't with them but with those that gave the orders.

[Noradin]

Do you think before you type? Alleged male hostage taker, has murdered the father, holds mother and sister hostage, has poured gasoline all over the house. What exactly do you think is left to conclude, when the only male supposedly alive, aka, the "hostage taker" comes to the door? Who exactly else would that man be in the scenario? The mother perhaps? Pretty easy calculation, don't you think. 2 males, minus one dead, means male showing at the door would be the one who murdered the other.

Speaking of grenades: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...o-disciplinary

Why do you expect local police to perform better, when seal team grenades hostages?

Do you read before you quote? Noticed those quotation marks around "resolve", did you?

The outcome (of getting the hostages killed) would certainly be archieved faster with grenades if they just randomly kill whoever answers the door anyway.
Especially when they shoot somewhere where there might be gasoline or whatever spread throughout the house.
And how would they even know for sure its "the last male alive" they obviously aren't clairvoyant otherwise they wouldn't have shot an innocent.

[Mehrunes]

You think the hostage taker would just answer the door himself leaving his hostages behind?
How would that person continue to hold his hostages hostage while being at the front door in plain view and unarmed?

You don't get it. The hostage taker was Professor Zoom. His completely uncharacteristic behavior of opening the doors just like that (and even stepping outside onto the porch IIRC) was him just baiting the police into getting close to apprehend him just so he could then sprint to the hostages and kill them all with the officers feeling extra helpless about it for bonus malice points. Please, it's not hard to figure it out. The officer who shot did.

As for the last male alive, it's obviously impossible for the father to have survived a wound with the caller being mistaken about the situation. It's not like the swatter that called the police was male either.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Yes, they are.

You don't send the bomb squad to defuse a bomb and then expect them NOT to look for bombs. This is a SWAT team that was sent to take down a killer and save the children. If multiple officers failed to do that, then they were !@#$ups, or recognized that the situation had been secured.

This isn't some "routine traffic stop", this is a SWAT team responding to shots fired and dead bodies already. If there is collateral damage or friendly fire due to the total failure to verify the information they were being sent out on, the fault wasn't with them but with those that gave the orders.

A) Not actually a SWAT team.
B) So, if they're the fuck ups...why is the officer that shot the only one that is suspended?

[Kellhound]

There is a probability that a call to pizza delivery (a prank call possibly) would result in a pizza guy crashing and killing himself and / or other people. Prank pizza calls are still not classified as 2nd degree murders. There is no way a non biased court would fall for 2nd degree here. Especially it being one of only 2 violent cases over the last 50 years of SWATting pranks practice, the other being a policeman getting wounded by an unsuspecting home owner.

Again, police violence against unarmed people is a known issue in the US, and it has been discussed for many years that swatting was going to get an innocent person killed. Thus there was a demonstrated disregard for human life.

[rowaasr13]

Do you think before you type? Alleged male hostage taker, has murdered the father, holds mother and sister hostage, has poured gasoline all over the house. What exactly do you think is left to conclude, when the only male supposedly alive, aka, the "hostage taker" comes to the door? Who exactly else would that man be in the scenario? The mother perhaps? Pretty easy calculation, don't you think. 2 males, minus one dead, means male showing at the door would be the one who murdered the other.

Perhaps some other house guest who wasn't mentioned and is a hostage too? Random neighbor that was captured by hostage taker while team was enroute? That's entire point, though it might be hard to understand for american: they're supposed to CONFIRM things before starting random executions.

[Noradin]

A) Not actually a SWAT team.
B) So, if they're the fuck ups...why is the officer that shot the only one that is suspended?

Because one fall guy is enough to make it seem like they are doing something(tm).

[PosPosPos]

For all the fine people defending the police, don't regret it if this very same thing happens to you, because you are the ones who normalize and enable your police force to butcher anyone they deem fit to without any justification whatsoever.