Cop should be charged with homicide.
Swatter should be charged with homicide
Both should be charged.
Can the swatter be charged with some other felony? If so, he’s automatically subject to a murder charge, no?
And fail to notice the lack of the smell of gasoline.
The suspect could have stolen the nuclear launch codes somehow and been on the verge of launching a hundred ICBM’s at Belgium. The cops’ decisive action prevented that.
We now know he didn’t happen to have the actual launch codes, but the cops should still be given medals for their selfless and heroic actions.
I don’t know what the legal standard or outcome will be, but it seems to me that sending the police to a residence on the belief that there is a violent crime in progress creates an inherently dangerous situation. I think that’s the point of “swatting.” What it reasonable foreseeable that someone was going to get killed in this precise sequence of events? I don’t know. Was is reasonable foreseeable that someone was going to get hurt? Absolutely. I don’t think you need to assume that the police are incompetent to recognize that this creates a situation that presents a real and forseeable risk that someone (occupant or police) is going to get shot.
The pranksters are partially liable. They created a situation where the police had reason to believe that gunfire and/or explosions were imminent. That made them more jumpy and prone to error. The police are partially liable. They should not fire unless a threat to their person is real. Firing before you actually see a gun or other weapon on the subject is unjustified. When you’re a trained marksman and you already have the suspect in your gun sights, you have an insurmountable edge on a suspect of unknown ability who has yet to demonstrate that he has a gun. I’m tired of those that think that cops have zero responsibility to assume the tiniest risk and that the only response to someone who fails a game of Simon Says with the cops is to empty a magazine into him.
Exactly right. The cops deserve all of the heat they get from incidents like this one. There is no excuse for shooting someone who was not an obvious threat at the time. If police want to be thought of as “professionals”, then they should darn well act like it. As in not shooting people who are not being threatening.
As for the bolded part above, I would raise the hurdle even higher. People are allowed to have guns in their home, and often out in public, as well. Merely seeing a gun isn’t enough to justify a shooting, let alone the “reaching for his waistband” excuse. If you live in a rural area, you know about game wardens. They interact with armed people (hunters) day in and day out, yet they don’t typically shoot first and ask questions later.
I’ve heard more than one LEO use the cliche “I’m going to be the one who goes home tonight”, and it disgusts me. This implies a very cavalier, disrespectful attitude toward the general public, and that overwhelming force is standard operating procedure, whether necessary or not. This attitude has spread far too wide throughout our police forces.
It wasn’t him who made it up, IIUIC.
Bob made a bet with Andy. Andy threatened Bob with Swatting him, said “I can find out where you live”. Bob laughed and said “here, let me make that easy for you: 321 Long Lake Road”. Andy hired Swautistic to make the call, providing him with the address given by Bob.
I was talking about the swatter, not the cop.
However it turns out that the accused swatter had already served time for making a bomb threat, so it is not like he didn’t know what he was doing.
Since the man has a ‘history’ of calling in bomb and gun threats, I hope that the local police took every precaution and arrested him in a 4am no-knock SWAT raid.
Beyond that, I agree with Orwell, above. If you’re so terrified to do your job as a police officer that you consider the casual death of innocents to be acceptable so that you can “go home safe”, then we as a nation need to strip you of your LEO license or accreditation immediately!.
Somebody asked up-thread somewhere, and I don’t think it was answered:
Bob lied to Andy, but there’s no law against lying to any-random-body. Andy passed on the lie to Swautistic, not knowing it was a lie, and Swautistic passed it on to police, not knowing it was a lie. So who, if anybody, can be charged with lying? It’s illegal to (knowingly) lie to police, but nobody did that here.
Answer, from some high-profile case in the news some years ago (no, I don’t even remember what the case was): If A lies to B with the expectation and intent that B will pass the lie on to police (or pass it on to S who will pass it on to police), then A can be charged with lying to police. The argument was tested in court and that’s what the court decided. Sorry, I have no recollection of what the case was except that it was some high-profile thing, much in the news.
Uhm, Swautistic lied to the police when he said that there was a hostage situation at that address. The fact that he made a false report targeting the wrong victim doesn’t make a difference.
Unless you think that Swautistic was providing the public service of relaying legitimate hostage situation reports when the actual hostages were able to get to a phone and is shocked, shocked to find that his services were being misused. 
Right - Andy and SWAuTistic conspired to file a false report, to wit that there was a killing/hostage situation at X address. That it was a real address but it was not Bob’s, does not mean it was any less a false report that led to the police reacting upon a false premise.
And it implies a preexisting frame of mind that *someone *will not be going home from the confrontation.
::Bump::
Tyler Barriss…was charged with involuntary manslaughter, giving a false alarm and interference with law enforcement.
He’s also been charged w/ making false calls in Canada.
Another bump
Barriss sentenced to 20-25 years
Good. SWATting is attempted murder. Plain and simple.
But absolutely nothing happened to the trigger-happy policeman who killed the guy.
If any law-talking folk happen to know, I am assuming from the bolded portions, ‘making a false report resulting in a death’ is a Federal crime? How long has it been so, or am I assuming too far, and the Federal aspect only came in because it was state-to-state.
Good.
I’m going to go beyond what Kobal2 said; this was murder, just like hiring a hitman. It was NOT the fault of the police - they can only act on what they’ve been told.
Wait a minute. Did the person who died threaten the police in a deadly manner with some sort of weapon? Or did he just step out of his own house?
I don’t have all of the details, but I’m not ready to forgive the police and say it was a good shooting. The family of the dead man is suing the police.
Barriss’ crime was serious, but so was the actual manslaughter committed by police. But something else intrigued me:
“Barriss agreed to serve 20 to 25 years in federal prison as part of a plea agreement, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Central District of Los Angeles.”
That seems like an awfully long sentence to agree to voluntarily. Is there more to the story?