British Man Charged after US Gamer Shot by SWAT Following Hoax Call

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Swatting has reportedly become routine, but this is the first time a Briton has been charged for making a fake call to dupe law enforcement into taking someone out. SWAT ended up shooting an innocent gamer in the face and chest with rubber bullets after they received information he was going to kill three people unless he got $15K in cash. Thanks to cageymaru for this one.

Robert McDaid, 21, from Coventry, faces multiple charges in the US after phoning a terrorism hotline to make threats while posing as another man, Tyran Dobbs. McDaid said he had a gun and explosives and would kill three people if he did not get $15k in cash, The Independent reports. The real Tyran Dobbs, a 20-year-old gamer from Maryland, was subsequently shot by US police who raided his home. Dobbs was hit in the face and chest with rubber bullets, fracturing his skull and bruising his lungs.
 
This wouldn't be a problem if some scouting was done before actually going in like mad-men.

But no, I guess it is a lot better to go arms at the ready. What could go wrong? In a country where people have weapons at their homes?

And no, that a guy was shot isn't the fault of whoever made the phone call. If law enforcement can't even assess the situation before going in they shouldn't be law enforcement at all.

Think (assess) -> act (go in).

Not the other way around, for the love of God.

No wonder shit happens...
 
prava said:
This wouldn't be a problem if some scouting was done before actually going in like mad-men.

But no, I guess it is a lot better to go arms at the ready. What could go wrong? In a country where people have weapons at their homes?

And no, that a guy was shot isn't the fault of whoever made the phone call. If law enforcement can't even assess the situation before going in they shouldn't be law enforcement at all.

Think (assess) -> act (go in).

Not the other way around, for the love of God.

No wonder shit happens...
Click to expand...

but the guy sleeping was black, so that is why the cops did what they did.
 
Anyone 'member a time when there was no such thing as SWATting? There were no voice programs to talk smack to each other, only phones? Only smack talk would be in the game chat itself, if the game even had it.

I 'member. :p
 
One thing I NEVER understand from these swatting incidents is this:

If the Police are called from a spoofed number and told there are dangerous activities taking/about to take place, why doesn't the dispatcher simply call the spoofed number back? That one little step would eliminate ALL swatting incidents and save the P.D.s time and effort.

"Hello?"

"Is this Tyran Dobbs?"

"Yes, can I help you?"

"Are you holding people hostage/wielding a firearm/ etc?"

If yes, GO,GO,GO!
If no, *click*.

DONE.
 
prava said:
This wouldn't be a problem if some scouting was done before actually going in like mad-men.

But no, I guess it is a lot better to go arms at the ready. What could go wrong? In a country where people have weapons at their homes?

And no, that a guy was shot isn't the fault of whoever made the phone call. If law enforcement can't even assess the situation before going in they shouldn't be law enforcement at all.

Think (assess) -> act (go in).

Not the other way around, for the love of God.

No wonder shit happens...
Click to expand...

I would not just let the Brit prankster off the hook though. It is one thing that bullets were sent flying, but another when a false police call was made with malicious intent which the Swotter arguable has.
 
The Gonz said:
One thing I NEVER understand from these swatting incidents is this:

If the Police are called from a spoofed number and told there are dangerous activities taking/about to take place, why doesn't the dispatcher simply call the spoofed number back? That one little step would eliminate ALL swatting incidents and save the P.D.s time and effort.

"Hello?"

"Is this Tyran Dobbs?"

"Yes, can I help you?"

"Are you holding people hostage/wielding a firearm/ etc?"

If yes, GO,GO,GO!
If no, *click*.

DONE.
Click to expand...

In most of these prank calls it probably goes like that, but it's the few that don't we keep hearing about.

I'm surprised authorities managed to arrest and charge someone for a change. You almost never hear about someone getting caught doing this, hence it will keep happening, and sadly we'll keep hearing about the few times police screw up.
 
prava said:
This wouldn't be a problem if some scouting was done before actually going in like mad-men.

But no, I guess it is a lot better to go arms at the ready. What could go wrong? In a country where people have weapons at their homes?

And no, that a guy was shot isn't the fault of whoever made the phone call. If law enforcement can't even assess the situation before going in they shouldn't be law enforcement at all.

Think (assess) -> act (go in).

Not the other way around, for the love of God.

No wonder shit happens...
Click to expand...

On the bright side, at least they had the common sense to use rubber bullets.


My question is how did they get such hair triggers to shoot someone who likely wasn't a threat? Assuming he didn't flip out and attack the SWAT team like an idiot.
 
prava said:
This wouldn't be a problem if some scouting was done before actually going in like mad-men.

But no, I guess it is a lot better to go arms at the ready. What could go wrong? In a country where people have weapons at their homes?

And no, that a guy was shot isn't the fault of whoever made the phone call. If law enforcement can't even assess the situation before going in they shouldn't be law enforcement at all.

Think (assess) -> act (go in).

Not the other way around, for the love of God.

No wonder shit happens...
Click to expand...


I think it's not so simple as you think it is.

Here are the two most likely outcomes;

1. It's a hoax and you go in and nothing happens at all. I did say most likely, in this case the cops did shoot the guy. They used rubber bullets which shows they thought they had the upper hand, had surprise working for them, and they could go less than lethal.

2. They do what you think is smart and a real terrorist kills someone because hey, they called, made a threat, and said they would. I sorta think that this alternative is highly likely to spot any attempts at scouting out the situation first.

Do you guys think?

It sux this guy got fucked up. But that is why the people responsible are getting charged with felony crimes. The guy is lucky the cops decided to risk less than lethal and didn't go in with lethal ammo. That is called restraint, it's called risking your officers because you are hoping you can get away with it. We could all wish the cop had hit the guy in the chest instead and that it hadn't messed up his face. But the cops are not at fault here because the risks on the other side are way too great.

that's how I see it.
 
lcpiper said:
I think it's not so simple as you think it is.

Here are the two most likely outcomes;

1. It's a hoax and you go in and nothing happens at all. I did say most likely, in this case the cops did shoot the guy. They used rubber bullets which shows they thought they had the upper hand, had surprise working for them, and they could go less than lethal.

2. They do what you think is smart and a real terrorist kills someone because hey, they called, made a threat, and said they would. I sorta think that this alternative is highly likely to spot any attempts at scouting out the situation first.

Do you guys think?

It sux this guy got fucked up. But that is why the people responsible are getting charged with felony crimes. The guy is lucky the cops decided to risk less than lethal and didn't go in with lethal ammo. That is called restraint, it's called risking your officers because you are hoping you can get away with it. We could all wish the cop had hit the guy in the chest instead and that it hadn't messed up his face. But the cops are not at fault here because the risks on the other side are way too great.

that's how I see it.
Click to expand...
It's easy to make snap judgments, when the reality is there's incredible tension and risk to life on the part of the officer during a raid. If you make a mistake, you can die. On the other hand, shooting an unarmed innocent person in the head and killing them never looks good. I don't know about SWAT, but regular officers are trained to aim for the torso, easiest center of mass to hit.
 
RAutrey said:
Protect and Serve

Militarize and Generate Revenue
Click to expand...

Cops attacks house;

evansville-milan-raid-4.png



Military attacks house;

Destroyed_house_in_Donbass1.jpg



I see a few differences here.
 
If you follow the link trail to the original story you can actually see the report from the police regarding the incident. The original link makes it sound like the police stormed the house and shot the guy in his sleep. In actuality it sounds like the guy was acting super suspicious and would not cooperate with police when asked to leave the apartment and surrender, instead he peaked out and went back in several times and on the 3rd time knowing their was still a female occupant and the suspects father saying there was a gun in the apartment they shot the guy with rubber bullets.

Why was the guy acting so oddly? Well for one sounds like he just woke up but also there was apparently drugs in the house which is why they believe he was acting the way he was. Now don't get me wrong he is still the victim, but the more information you have about the situation the more you can understand whey a police officer would act the way they did given the information they were supplied (not their job to determine the validity of the source, but obviously there's room for improvement on someone's end).

The details certainly were lost along the way as it was re-reported, but that's the media for you.
 
tetris42 said:
It's easy to make snap judgments, when the reality is there's incredible tension and risk to life on the part of the officer during a raid. If you make a mistake, you can die. On the other hand, shooting an unarmed innocent person in the head and killing them never looks good. I don't know about SWAT, but regular officers are trained to aim for the torso, easiest center of mass to hit.
Click to expand...

If you follow the links and read the police statement it specifies the officer that shot him was aiming for centre mass and after the first rubber bullet hit the suspect doubled over causing the second round to hit him in the face. So you are absolutely correct where they were trained to aim and attempted to do so.
 
tetris42 said:
It's easy to make snap judgments, when the reality is there's incredible tension and risk to life on the part of the officer during a raid. If you make a mistake, you can die. On the other hand, shooting an unarmed innocent person in the head and killing them never looks good. I don't know about SWAT, but regular officers are trained to aim for the torso, easiest center of mass to hit.
Click to expand...


True true.

But how many really get the kind of training they need?

Some cops only shoot the minimum they need to stay qualified. Some departments don't spend the money they should, or can't cause they just don't have it. And no one here was there watching when this happened to know why the cop shot him in the face.

Here is much better info and it does a much better job of explaining why this man was shot.
http://wjla.com/features/7-on-your-...ime-trend-both-locally-and-nationally--115595

Dobbs himself said when police woke him up with a call on his cellphone, he said he told them he would come outside. Dobbs said he walked around the apartment looking for something to put on because it was a cold February night. He said he walked out to the living room, saw the SWAT{ } team, and heard police yelling at him to come out. He said he turned around to go get his girlfriend but was shot. He said he doesn't remember anything after that rubber bullet him in the face.
Click to expand...

So the cops did call his phone first.

And the point where he ignored the cops orders and turned away, that's how people get themselves shot by cops. By not obeying their commands.
 
Reimu said:
I would not just let the Brit prankster off the hook though. It is one thing that bullets were sent flying, but another when a false police call was made with malicious intent which the Swotter arguable has.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that. But up to 20 years is a lot of time for a stupid phone call. 'cause, in the end, that is what this is about. A stupid phone call.

lcpiper said:
I think it's not so simple as you think it is.

Here are the two most likely outcomes;

1. It's a hoax and you go in and nothing happens at all. I did say most likely, in this case the cops did shoot the guy. They used rubber bullets which shows they thought they had the upper hand, had surprise working for them, and they could go less than lethal.

2. They do what you think is smart and a real terrorist kills someone because hey, they called, made a threat, and said they would. I sorta think that this alternative is highly likely to spot any attempts at scouting out the situation first.

Do you guys think?

It sux this guy got fucked up. But that is why the people responsible are getting charged with felony crimes. The guy is lucky the cops decided to risk less than lethal and didn't go in with lethal ammo. That is called restraint, it's called risking your officers because you are hoping you can get away with it. We could all wish the cop had hit the guy in the chest instead and that it hadn't messed up his face. But the cops are not at fault here because the risks on the other side are way too great.

that's how I see it.
Click to expand...

I do think it is that simple:

You have to assess the real danger before doing anything. Can you imagine that 911 would send a whole firefighters brigade every time somebody called freaking out about some shit being on fire? Specially in a country where firearms are everywhere. Not only because you might put your officers on an unneeded dangerous situation, but because US law is VERY trigger happy and people end up being dead more often than not on raids like this.

In the US, a cop acts first then asks question. Any time he THINKS there is a threat, he is allowed to use lethal force. So, in a scenario when they are sent for whatever reasons... they will assume the worst and act like that.

Heck, if you ask me, it is much worse to get into a situation you don't know, rather than take your time to study it. If somebody dies because an armed robbery then... that is on the thief. But if somebody dies because police went to the wrong house... then that is on the entire society, because they allowed the chain of mistakes that killed that very human being. Yes, an officer pulled the trigger... but he was sent there with the orders to resolve the situation. And the way cops resolve situations in the USA is by putting their lifes at risk (and when they feel they are at risk... they use their weapons). Youtube is full of videos of terribly situations in which people died that were forced by LEOs.

For reference, according to some sources, around 1000 people were killed in the USA by police in 2016 in different situations. FYI, less than 50 were killed all across Europe in the same time frame.

So yes, something is VERY wrong with how law enforcement works in the USA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dgz
like this
lcpiper said:
True true.

But how many really get the kind of training they need?

Some cops only shoot the minimum they need to stay qualified. Some departments don't spend the money they should, or can't cause they just don't have it. And no one here was there watching when this happened to know why the cop shot him in the face.

Here is much better info and it does a much better job of explaining why this man was shot.
http://wjla.com/features/7-on-your-...ime-trend-both-locally-and-nationally--115595



So the cops did call his phone first.

And the point where he ignored the cops orders and turned away, that's how people get themselves shot by cops. By not obeying their commands.
Click to expand...

I would come out naked so they can't say I was reaching for a gun inside my jacket or whatever. It might look insane but probably would keep me from getting killed.

At least they didn't kill this dude's dog. #1 thing SWAT will do if they have to enter your house is kill your dog because it could be a threat.

The fact that these people are only going to get up to 20 years is the real kick in the balls. Why can't this be charged as attempted murder? It's pretty likely someone could get killed from it, especially if SWAT no-knocks the house and busts in.
 
lcpiper said:
So the cops did call his phone first.

And the point where he ignored the cops orders and turned away, that's how people get themselves shot by cops. By not obeying their commands.
Click to expand...

And ignoring the cops orders means you get shot? Yes, in the USA. But not in the rest of the world. Funny if you ask me.

Lets just ignore that you might be ignoring those orders because... drunk, high, sleepy, confused or many other reasons.

"Hey, lets just shoot the guy. No matter that he isn't dangerous. Lets be certain. Just shoot him. Law protects us".
 
5icko said:
^ Ugh. Can you give us the nickel version?
Click to expand...

TLDR; Police responded
- Confirmed three women inside

- Called the kid's landlord/father and confirmed there was a gun in the apartment and wasn't sure about the threat being reasonable. (Crazy kids these days with their hip hop radio and color TVs)

- Neogotiator called a woman in the apartment and she and her child left. Girlfriend (possible hostage) stayed inside.

- Dobbs didn't comply with police and kept his hand inside his shirt (May be hiding the gun). Bullet that went for the face was intended for torso.



What I don't get is why the neogotiator didn't talk to the woman and the child that had left to confirm the situation. Isn't that sort of the normal protocol, to gather more information about what's inside: Weapons, intent, motive, demands?
 
Last edited:
lcpiper said:
So the cops did call his phone first.

And the point where he ignored the cops orders and turned away, that's how people get themselves shot by cops. By not obeying their commands.
Click to expand...

I dunno about you, I don't wake up prepared to be arrested by a swat team. I see your point about obeying, but I do see a level of confusion and panic can occur in the stress of the situation, equally for the police involved.

I do feel there is no perfect way to handle and filter these out without weakening the other side. Maybe elevate the punishment for 'swatting' to the point it is pretty fearful to want to do to someone.

People want to apply generic 'rules' to these situations but it just isn't that simple. I am glad they did come with less-than-lethal rounds.
 
P4B said:
ppl losing freedom in both so no
Click to expand...

You fail the comprehension test. And no one lost any freedom here. This poor guy was certainly a victim and hopefully they convict the guys who made this all happen as they deserve it.

But my comment was directed at someone spouting that bullshit about police militarization, another guy who doesn't actually know anything about what he is running his mouth about.

My pictures were supposed to demonstrate the difference. When I was in the Army no one was training us to use flash bangs to breach a door, we just blow the fucking house up and roll on.

Soldiers don't use rubber bullets when they have real ones

They don't use flash bangs when they have fragmentation grenades

They don't knock down doors when they can knock down the entire building

They do not care about preserving life as they are there to take it.

Do not make the mistake of thinking the last 15 years of "warfare" in Iraq and Afghanistan are normal behavior for an Army. And don't be fooled into thinking that police in the US are using Army tactics against our people. The cops developed their own tactics all on their own back in the 60's, when they formed the first S.W.A.T. teams. Cops had machineguns and armored cars even back during prohibition.
 
lcpiper said:
And the point where he ignored the cops orders and turned away, that's how people get themselves shot by cops. By not obeying their commands.
Click to expand...

I don't think it should have gotten like that, but it is reality. Obey or face certain death (or a beatdown, which is what I'd most expect). Killing someone because they didn't obey you is a bit insane, especially if they are not a threat.

After reading that report, I don't blame the Police in that matter. They did look into it a bit and acted on what little information they did have. I'm just wondering why the first woman that got out didn't tell the Police that there was no hostage situation... The Police did their quick and dirty assessment and what little investigation they could given a possible high risk situation. The guy acting suspicious (for an unrelated reason) didn't help matters. Not obeying escalated it. Without the drugs, things would have ended much different. Would have been less shots fired.

All in all, the dude in the UK is gonna get fucked. The Police did things right, IMO. The guy that got shot was a victim of the swatting, but he didn't help the situation at all.
 
Darunion said:
I dunno about you, I don't wake up prepared to be arrested by a swat team. I see your point about obeying, but I do see a level of confusion and panic can occur in the stress of the situation, equally for the police involved.

I do feel there is no perfect way to handle and filter these out without weakening the other side. Maybe elevate the punishment for 'swatting' to the point it is pretty fearful to want to do to someone.

People want to apply generic 'rules' to these situations but it just isn't that simple. I am glad they did come with less-than-lethal rounds.
Click to expand...

I agree, but as someone else pointed out, the details even go beyond what I found.

The other thing I pointed out was that this actually happened a couple years ago so the swatting thing was still pretty new at the time. Somehow we just never heard much about this case then so it sounds like it just happened and some hindsight on previous hoaxes would have tempered the cop's reactions. But this was before it was a big deal and still the cops actually showed decent judgement.

Just woke up, odd behavior, drugs in the house, a gun reported by the father in the house. All these things add up to a hurt young man but it's not the situation some people are making it out to be.
 
lcpiper said:
Just woke up, odd behavior, drugs in the house, a gun reported by the father in the house. All these things add up to a hurt young man but it's not the situation some people are making it out to be.
Click to expand...

And people (the general public) are most critical when something goes wrong, they don't analyze things as deeply when the outcome is good. Granted it also doesn't get journalism either. Had they done something different and no one was hurt and they got the caller, this never would have been a headline.
 
RogueTadhg said:
TLDR; Police responded
- Confirmed three women inside

- Called the kid's landlord/father and confirmed there was a gun in the apartment and wasn't sure about the threat being reasonable. (Crazy kids these days with their hip hop radio and color TVs)

- Neogotiator called a woman in the apartment and she and her child left. Girlfriend (possible hostage) stayed inside.

- Dobbs didn't comply with police and kept his hand inside his shirt (May be hiding the gun). Bullet that went for the face was intended for torso.



What I don't get is why the neogotiator didn't talk to the woman and the child that had left to confirm the situation. Isn't that sort of the normal protocol, to gather more information about what's inside: Weapons, intent, motive, demands?
Click to expand...

This is the police version? Or is there a video?

Sorry, skeptical of anything written on a form by law enforcement. Full of a bunch of trigger happy morons/thugs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top