Serial Swatter Charged With Involuntary Manslaughter

Sure, you can spoof your number, but can you answer a call back on the spoofed number? Can the spoofed number have an address associated with it?
"Hey buddy, we see you're calling from a landline about 50 miles away from the address you're reporting. Want to explain that?" It's that simple.
Mobile phones have Geo911 for triangulation. If they're calling and it's not even near the area, that's pretty suspect to me.

From my reading he didn't call 911, he called a city council number then police called him back.
 
People are forgetting the police killed that innocent person. If the police actually do their job correctly, they wouldn't need to RAID every house that gets a call about. Swatting would not be a thing if the police didn't send the swat military to people's homes. Yes, he is a scumbag but the real problem is the police allow swatting to happen.

1. This wasn' a SWAT team.

2. The police didn't raid anyone's house. They were on scene attempting to gather more information, they never attempted to contact the house (they were working on a way to do just that) when Finch came out the front door on his own.

3. Finch didn't want to comply with loud verbal commands. Possibly because finch was a convicted felon, for flee and elude and discharge firearm into occupied dwelling or vehicle. Now, this next part is in all caps, for the benefit of the fucktards who are gonna miss it anyway: NO HIS PAST HISTORY DIDN'T MEAN HE SHOULD DIE ON THIS NIGHT. I'M GUESSING THE COPS DIDN'T EVEN KNOW HE WAS IN THE HOUSE. IT COULD VERY WELL EXPLAIN HIS REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH COMMANDS, THOUGH.

4. Finch got shot for taking what looked like a shooting stance.

5. All the above is public record and has been included in news releases about the incident. If certain people can't be bothered to educate themselves on this topic, perhaps they'd look less like idiots if they avoided posting nonsense. Butthurt? No fucks given. Learn to use a fucking search engine.
 
1. This wasn' a SWAT team.

2. The police didn't raid anyone's house. They were on scene attempting to gather more information, they never attempted to contact the house (they were working on a way to do just that) when Finch came out the front door on his own.

3. Finch didn't want to comply with loud verbal commands. Possibly because finch was a convicted felon, for flee and elude and discharge firearm into occupied dwelling or vehicle. Now, this next part is in all caps, for the benefit of the fucktards who are gonna miss it anyway: NO HIS PAST HISTORY DIDN'T MEAN HE SHOULD DIE ON THIS NIGHT. I'M GUESSING THE COPS DIDN'T EVEN KNOW HE WAS IN THE HOUSE. IT COULD VERY WELL EXPLAIN HIS REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH COMMANDS, THOUGH.

4. Finch got shot for taking what looked like a shooting stance.

5. All the above is public record and has been included in news releases about the incident. If certain people can't be bothered to educate themselves on this topic, perhaps they'd look less like idiots if they avoided posting nonsense. Butthurt? No fucks given. Learn to use a fucking search engine.

Things like facts don't suit their agenda..why would they bother with those? The overwhelming majority of people who get shot even if the police shouldn't have been there in the first place, would not have gotten shot if they simply did what they were told to do. But Noooo most of them have to be dickheads and argue, refuse or in many cases threaten the police.
 
Things like facts don't suit their agenda..why would they bother with those? The overwhelming majority of people who get shot even if the police shouldn't have been there in the first place, would not have gotten shot if they simply did what they were told to do. But Noooo most of them have to be dickheads and argue, refuse or in many cases threaten the police.

Darwinism in current year
 
Ok. But lets talk about some common sense. Does it makes sense to send a swat team after a report like that from a different area code? From across the country? Or does it make more sense to establish credible and non-credible reports?
How about calling a neighbor to confirm the report? How about checking to see if there's been cases of domestic disturbances from the same address?

Besides just sending the swat team out whenever someone claims they saw a gun, why not use some common sense instead? If the phone number is from a different area code/state then get confirmation first. If it's from a mobile phone, then use Geo911 to pinpoint the location. If the call sounds fishy, call them back for confirmation. Call a neighbor to see if there's something wrong or if they can see if there's cause for alarm.

Then yes, there's also locking these people away and not treating it like a prank call. But yes, sending the swat team out to anyone who calls and files a bogus report, then going in there guns blazing shooting anything that moves is extreme to the max and easy to abuse (obviously).

There was no fucking SWAT team. Jesus Christ all Friday, do any of you even read the fucking articles?
 
It was more likely he didn't think the cops were there for him and he pulled out his phone to take a picture.

But hey I just watched the video.
 
Thanks for proving my point. A statistically impossible number of officers have ever been accused of a crime. 0.008% of departments. Come on man. Ever hear that if something is too good to be true, it probably is? Not saying the number is higher, I accept that 0.008% of departments have been accused. What I'm saying is that way more departments than that are fucking up and getting away with it.

And that would be 100% speculation on your part.
 
And that would be 100% speculation on your part.
Yeah, I mean it's important to note that those original numbers were entirely pulled out of thin air. It's not really speculation to say they aren't accurate.
 
Easy. In cases in which you can't verify the claim then don't go in guns blazing. Go and get prepared and do a knock/ring doorbell search or try and verify the complaint first.

For the cases of spoofing, there should be ways to detect iffy numbers. Just spoofing caller id will not let you answer a callback. Using an allocated phone number will not let you set an address and can probably be detected.

In cases where the spoofed address (landline) address is no where near the complaint address, ask how they got that info? Obviously if someone is calling from a address that's even 15 miles away and they claim to see someone waving around a gun in a threatening manner, ask them how they're calling on that line?
If you call back and no one answers after you just spoke to them, treat it as an unverified claim. Don't go rushing into unverified claims but do follow up.

It's just common sense stuff. When you treat every report as credible and go in with raids where everyone thinks there's a weapon somewhere, then there's people that liable to get hurt.

I'm not defending the officer that shot the victim here or the process that was followed by SWAT*, just want to make that clear. This needs to be fully reviewed.

Speaking specifically about the response time side of this, adding delays to suspected inaccurate calls is going to cause delays on valid calls. There are enough improperly configured systems out there, both private and with the Telcos, that delaying due to a screwy looking number or address is going to get people killed as well. Delaying the deployment of the SWAT* team would be potentially delaying resolution of valid situations.

Yes, I believe they should be tracking down these calls while the SWAT* team is being deployed and while they're on-site. All pertinent information should be relayed to the team on-site in real time. This may be part of the process already and we don't hear about it. 911 operators typically try to keep the callers on the phone, and call back if they get disconnected, etc.

As to your point earlier about having a neighbor try to figure out if there's something wrong is risking putting other people in danger. Sure, call and ask them if they have heard anything, but tell them to stay away from windows, etc. And again, you can't delay the deployment of SWAT in these types of situations because if it's a valid call, you're delaying resolution.

Yes, I think they should be using more non-lethal intervention. Yes, I think SWAT* needs continuous training for deescalation and threat assessment. Yes, I think that firing before actually seeing a gun from 40 meters is terrible and unfortunate. Yes, I think a full review process needs to be done and any appropriate action taken. No, I don't understand or pretend to comprehend what the officers go through.

*edited - Didn't realize this was not SWAT, am more speaking about response times and delay of resolution, not necessarily even related to this incident.
 
Last edited:
Facts like "he must have moved his hands to his waist because he's a convicted felon"?

do officers instruct people to put their hands on their hips? No. They instruct them to put their hands in the air where they can clearly be seen. Go watch the actual video. The guys hands are on his hips and he points at them. In the dark at that distance claiming that didn't look like he was pointing a gun is disingenuous at best.

and to Quote the official report.

“Officers gave him several verbal commands to put his hands up and walk towards them. The male complied for a very short time and then put his hands back down to his waist. The officers continued to give him verbal commands to put his hands up, and he lowered them again.

“The male then turned towards the officers on the east side of the residence, lowered his hands to the waistband again, then suddenly pulled them back up towards those officers at the east.

Sorry but these actions aren't defensible in the slightest. It is absolutely a reasonable assumption he pulled a gun. So yes..things like Facts matter.
 
Thanks for proving my point. A statistically impossible number of officers have ever been accused of a crime. 0.008% of departments. Come on man. Ever hear that if something is too good to be true, it probably is? Not saying the number is higher, I accept that 0.008% of departments have been accused. What I'm saying is that way more departments than that are fucking up and getting away with it.


Well just like you can't make broad assumption about people and convict them of crimes based on stereotypes, you also can't make the same conclusions regarding cops and "the Blue Line".

If you have proof or at least something to base a suspicion on.... but until an investigation has been completed then all we have to go on is that one is being done.

But I can't be the only person asking "why did only one officer shoot, and why only a single round?" It's far from the normal response from what I have read on prior Use of Force incidents.
 
He already did 3 years for fake bomb threats ....... His comments make it clear that he is mentally incapable of accepting his responsibility for his actions. He can't be rehabilitated, he's a broken human who is fixated on creating dangerous, even deadly situations for other people.

This is one of those cases where the real just action would be a quick and painless death with the least additional cost to the public.

You can't free him again, he's proven that he will repeat his crimes. Unless you think that you can somehow "teach" him what he seems incapable of understanding.

So...failing to learn from a 2.5 year sentence in the past means he's irredeemable, and should therefore be put to death? Sorry, that's crazy talk.
 
Imagine if a CCW holder "thought" he seen a gun on an irate dude at the store or something and ends up shooting him only to find a cellphone.

How do you think that would play out for the CCW holder?

Remember when people thought it would turn into the wild west when CCW permits started becoming prevalent? Amazing how those extremely basic "guns 101" classes so many gun noobs took to get their permit was enough to teach them responsible gun control.
 
So...failing to learn from a 2.5 year sentence in the past means he's irredeemable, and should therefore be put to death? Sorry, that's crazy talk.

Not me. Not in light of his statements he has made that make it completely clear that he doesn't see that he is doing anything wrong. He actually believes that he didn't do anything serious and that he is faultless for the shooting death of Andrew Finch even though it was his actions alone that set the situation in place and put the dead man into the gun sights of the cops. This is a 25 year old man, not a teenager.

How about you ask the Finch Family what should be done with Tyler Barriss?

Ask them if I'm talking crazy.

If you don't want to bother asking them I'll understand, we can take their statements to the media as they are;
Finch and Hernandez-Caballero said they want to see the officer – identified only as a seven-year veteran of the department – and the person who made the false report held accountable.

“The person who made the phone call took my nephew, her son, two kids’ father,” Hernandez-Caballero said. “How does it feel to be a murderer? I can’t believe people do this on purpose.”


Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article192147194.html#storylink=cpy

They don't hold the Officer blaimless, but they sure see Tyler Barriss as responsible for murder as well.

It's not crazy to support the death penalty for murder ........ not crazy at all.
 
There was no fucking SWAT team. Jesus Christ all Friday, do any of you even read the fucking articles?
Maybe not in this case, but calling the police and reporting something that isn't true just to get them to go out there and treat it like a crime scene is called Swatting.
Whether it's the offical Swat team or a bunch cops showing up, at that point it doesn't matter.
 
Not me. Not in light of his statements he has made that make it completely clear that he doesn't see that he is doing anything wrong. He actually believes that he didn't do anything serious and that he is faultless for the shooting death of Andrew Finch even though it was his actions alone that set the situation in place and put the dead man into the gun sights of the cops. This is a 25 year old man, not a teenager.

How about you ask the Finch Family what should be done with Tyler Barriss?

Ask them if I'm talking crazy.

If you don't want to bother asking them I'll understand, we can take their statements to the media as they are;


They don't hold the Officer blaimless, but they sure see Tyler Barriss as responsible for murder as well.

It's not crazy to support the death penalty for murder ........ not crazy at all.

There's generally a reason we don't put victims on juries: Because they are incapable of being impartial.

And the argument wasn't whether he deserves to die for what he did (though he doesn't), but rather whether society should conclude that the man is irredeemable, and should therefore be put to death to PREVENT FUTURE CRIMES. Preemptive execution is a bit of a stretch, even among serious deathly penalty advocates.
 
There's generally a reason we don't put victims on juries: Because they are incapable of being impartial.

And the argument wasn't whether he deserves to die for what he did (though he doesn't), but rather whether society should conclude that the man is irredeemable, and should therefore be put to death to PREVENT FUTURE CRIMES. Preemptive execution is a bit of a stretch, even among serious deathly penalty advocates.
Ehhh.... if you do something that directly causes someone to die, and have a long history of doing similar things that could have caused people to die, then it is quite possible that you need to be removed from society and also the death sentence can be used against you to pay for your crimes (in having people die or putting them in harms way).
 
More like, "yeah, I told a rapist where to find someone, and I described them in detail. What are you going to do about it?" His only way of arguing he didn't conspire to murder is he didn't tell them to kill anyone, and that's pretty fucked up. And arguing that he knew they would, would require assuming that the officers would kill as a matter of fact, regardless of the situation (or, the legal defense would spin it that way, anyway).

No, it's like him describing the person and where to find her, then feeding false information like "she means yes when she says no" and "she is a kinky person that likes force and being done by strangers. It's not rape to her, she just wants to act like it's rape."

So...failing to learn from a 2.5 year sentence in the past means he's irredeemable, and should therefore be put to death? Sorry, that's crazy talk.

No, it is failing to learn, a continued disregard for human life, lack of remorse, multiple pending offences; the list goes on. All of that combined makes him irredeemable. To imply that it is only the previous sentence that makes us call him irredeemable is disingeniuous at best.
 
Here's an idea: to those who want to rehabilitate this guy, undertake the responsibility for him. Totally. Don't put it on those of use who'd put him to death or throw away the key. You volunteer to house him. You feed him when he's hungry. I don't think he's employee material. You may think so. When he goes off the rails, you put up your house, your car, your future earnings, your LIFE...in his stead. Pledge your house against a surety bond for his behavior. Put your freedom on the line instead of his. Let him live in your house, eat at your table, sleep under your roof. Take him to your doctor. Pay for his bills. You do this. If he gets convicted of a crime, go to jail in his place. Give up your possessions for recompense. Send your children to jail for his crimes. Put yourself, and your family, between him and the rest of society.

If you're not willing to do that, then why do you think someone else should? Putting an animal back into society means that someone, who is most likely a stranger to you, will have to pay the price for your morality. Instead, you should step up.

That poor guy in Kansas, and his family? They had to pay because this piece of trash was released back into society. Too bad it wasn't someone who knew of him and thought he was rehabilitated.
 
Here's an idea: to those who want to rehabilitate this guy, undertake the responsibility for him. Totally. Don't put it on those of use who'd put him to death or throw away the key. You volunteer to house him. You feed him when he's hungry. I don't think he's employee material. You may think so. When he goes off the rails, you put up your house, your car, your future earnings, your LIFE...in his stead. Pledge your house against a surety bond for his behavior. Put your freedom on the line instead of his. Let him live in your house, eat at your table, sleep under your roof. Take him to your doctor. Pay for his bills. You do this. If he gets convicted of a crime, go to jail in his place. Give up your possessions for recompense. Send your children to jail for his crimes. Put yourself, and your family, between him and the rest of society.

If you're not willing to do that, then why do you think someone else should? Putting an animal back into society means that someone, who is most likely a stranger to you, will have to pay the price for your morality. Instead, you should step up.

That poor guy in Kansas, and his family? They had to pay because this piece of trash was released back into society. Too bad it wasn't someone who knew of him and thought he was rehabilitated.

Wow, so much wrong here not sure where to begin. I'm honestly not entirely sure you're serious.

First of all, "someone else" wouldn't be paying -- we all would be, in the form of taxes. We share the cost. That's how society works. The less-than-subtle suggestion that anone who would prefer rehabilitation must solely bear the cost of doing so as to avoid hypocrisy is inane.

Second, you seem awfully quick to label someone an "animal" or a "piece of trash." Do you honestly believe that it is impossible that this guy might come to understand and regret his actions? That society would be better off if we just killed people you (or someone) deems "trash"? And are you really comfortable with the government wielding that kind of power?

Also, enough with the false dichotomies. The only two position here aren't "turn him lose to rape and pillage, LOL!" or "hang 'em high!" The world isn't black and white, and you'd be well served to quit fighting straw men.
 
Last edited:
No, it is failing to learn, a continued disregard for human life, lack of remorse, multiple pending offences; the list goes on. All of that combined makes him irredeemable. To imply that it is only the previous sentence that makes us call him irredeemable is disingeniuous at best.

Irredeemable. You keep using that word...I do not think it means what you think it means.
 
sadly that guy is not going to change his ways, from his interviews he takes no responsibility for his actions. he will keep on making bomb threats and having people swatted until he's locked up for a very long time.
 
sadly that guy is not going to change his ways, from his interviews he takes no responsibility for his actions. he will keep on making bomb threats and having people swatted until he's locked up for a very long time.

Then we should lock him up for a good ten years, during which we try to teach him some empathy. And then, if he is ready, proceed with some sort of supervised release (aka parole).

I'm not suggesting we fine him and release him; he needs to do some real time. But when people start howling for summary executions...sorry, you lost me. If nothing else, it's delusional to imagine that kind of power won't be misused.
 
I like how a side comes up with reasons and try to rationalize that we shouldn’t take the life of a person who denied other people their right to live. Take a life on purpose forfeit yours.

Even if perps phone call that started this whole mess didn’t pull the trigger his actions certainly led up to these events. Also his current remorse is a plea to get out of jail, prior to the judgement call it was all fun and games.
 
Irredeemable. You keep using that word...I do not think it means what you think it means.

You were the one that used that word.

No, I do not believe everyone can be "saved." By extension, I do not believe everyone is worth "saving." "Saving" someone is a drain to society, and in the end, will they be a net contributor or net detriment to society? Yes, it is what some consider to be an archaic or even barbaric way of thinking, but I firmly believe that attempting to "save" everyone regardless of cost, time, and manpower invested will lead to a decline in society.

Maybe if we ever figure out how to create something from nothing and reverse entropy will a "save everyone" mentaility work.
 
Right. We get it. You aren't going to convince anyone, and no one is going to convince you. If you think being a cop is so easy, go do it yourself. Better yet, go train some cops if you're so damn smart.
Great, so when someone swats you and your wife or kids is killed, come back and tell me how the cops did the right thing. They barely talked to the guy. The guy did NOT threaten them.

But I get it, you think cops have a license to kill at will. "Why'd you shoot him?" Cop: "I got a scary phone call." Tsumi: "Not Guilty."
 
1. This wasn' a SWAT team.

2. The police didn't raid anyone's house. They were on scene attempting to gather more information, they never attempted to contact the house (they were working on a way to do just that) when Finch came out the front door on his own.

3. Finch didn't want to comply with loud verbal commands. Possibly because finch was a convicted felon, for flee and elude and discharge firearm into occupied dwelling or vehicle. Now, this next part is in all caps, for the benefit of the fucktards who are gonna miss it anyway: NO HIS PAST HISTORY DIDN'T MEAN HE SHOULD DIE ON THIS NIGHT. I'M GUESSING THE COPS DIDN'T EVEN KNOW HE WAS IN THE HOUSE. IT COULD VERY WELL EXPLAIN HIS REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH COMMANDS, THOUGH.

4. Finch got shot for taking what looked like a shooting stance.

5. All the above is public record and has been included in news releases about the incident. If certain people can't be bothered to educate themselves on this topic, perhaps they'd look less like idiots if they avoided posting nonsense. Butthurt? No fucks given. Learn to use a fucking search engine.


Guy got murdered by a pussy ass cop that was probably pissing him self because he wanted to be Rambo.

how the fuck would you react if out of the blue your house was lit up, lights blinding you, and yelling from across the street behind cars, with a bunch of car engines running.

That cop should get the chair right after the guy that made the call.


e6a.jpg
 
Last edited:
how the fuck would you react if out of the blue your house was lit up, lights blinding you, and yelling from across the street behind cars, with a bunch of car engines running.
I'd not walk out the front door, and I'd probably dial 911.
 
You must be that one human that somehow never slows down to take a peak at accidents too.
I mean, I wont rear-end the guy in front of me trying not to slow down, and if I have room and I'm not going super fast I'll take a peek. But yeah, I generally will not slow down to look at accidents, just enough to be safe. Likewise, I might peek out the window, but I wouldn't walk out the front door. If there's shouting and police cars, I have no business out there, other than letting the dispatcher k know what's going on outside my house (and inside, once I realize what they're there for).
 
You must be that one human that somehow never slows down to take a peak at accidents too.
Well I always slow down :) It's illegal around here to go more then 60 km/h around vehicles flashing emergency lights...
 
Great, so when someone swats you and your wife or kids is killed, come back and tell me how the cops did the right thing. They barely talked to the guy. The guy did NOT threaten them.

But I get it, you think cops have a license to kill at will. "Why'd you shoot him?" Cop: "I got a scary phone call." Tsumi: "Not Guilty."

I would not give a reason for the cops to shoot me in the first place. But go on believing this guy did absolutely nothing that might have set a cop off.
 
Yes, Jail is about rehabilitation. There are programs in place for retraining, medical professionals (psychologists and others) to do evaluations of individuals, etc. It is literally about rehabilitation. Just because it has become a profit centre in the USA does not mean that is the designed intent.

There's even programs that help transition former felons into jobs.

Jail is not, and has never been, there to rehabilitate people. That's a BIG misconception. It is to contain those who refuse to abide by the rules of civilization and are dangerous to the population, until they are no longer a threat. If they decide to not be a threat anymore, then fine, let them out. Otherwise, they should be kept in until they are too old to be a threat.
 
This is the kind of toxicity I associate CoD behavior with. I'm sure there are other idiot communities too, not just limited to CoD.

I hope there is a blanket ban for him from all gaming platforms (if such a thing is even feasible). It seems as if that sort of thing would bother him more given his proclivity. Messed up priorities.
 
Back
Top