Swatting "Prank" Ends Up in Death?

Status
Not open for further replies.
FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,602
Cageymaru sent this over to me early Friday morning. A man was killed in Kansas, as reported by the The Wichita Eagle, in what seemed to be another Swatting event. At that time there was no hard evidence that pointed towards Swatting, although circumstantial evidence seemed to point to that. PCMag has published an article late Friday that points to a story behind the event that has not yet been fully verified. The issues with this form of "prank" are far from undocumented, although, if that is what happened here, it is the first time it has resulted in a death. The Wichita Police Department gave a full statement, along with the recorded 911 call late on Friday. It was only a matter of time.

UPDATE: LAPD: Los Angeles man arrested in connection to deadly 'swatting' call in Wichita.

The Call of Duty gaming community also say the whole feud was over a mere $1.50 wager. Allegedly, a person behind the Twitter handle @SWAuTistic initiated the swatting in attempt to harrass [sic] a rival Call of Duty player with the Twitter handle @7aLeNT, who gave out the wrong address.

Update: Seems to have an interview with the person that did this.


 
Last edited:
1. Swatters should be held accountable for their actions and damages that incur. Which means if someone dies because of their call they should be charged with premeditated murder/manslaughter, or if they are injured - attempted at the very least.

2. Police should be confirming these cases and confirm hostiles before they just go in blasting, which means they need to be held accountable for their actions as well. There is literally no reason for that to happen. Lack of training, or lack of command.
 
This case is going to get crazy on the legal side.

Lawyers are going to go after every one, like they don't already right? But really everyone.

Police department going to get a law suit.
Kid who gave the fake address, will get a lawsuit and maybe some sort of involuntary manslaughter or wrongful death attempted to prosecution that will probably not stand.
If they can find the swatter he will get all of the above.
Parents of everyone above is going to get hit.


Also I heard that people can spoof phone numbers why is that even still a thing? How the heck are phone numbers not more secure than that now days?
 
rudy said:
This case is going to get crazy on the legal side.

Lawyers are going to go after every one, like they don't already right? But really everyone.

Police department going to get a law suit.
Kid who gave the fake address, will get a lawsuit and maybe some sort of involuntary manslaughter or wrongful death attempted to prosecution that will probably not stand.
If they can find the swatter he will get all of the above.
Parents of everyone above is going to get hit.


Also I heard that people can spoof phone numbers why is that even still a thing? How the heck are phone numbers not more secure than that now days?
Click to expand...
It's trivial. I spoof them regularly.
 
This is some shit that really shouldn't be in the news even though the thought of that in and of itself is fucked up, because it will just give more dumbasses the idea to do it.

Damned if you tell and damned if you don't.
 
reFre5h said:
1. Swatters should be held accountable for their actions and damages that incur. Which means if someone dies because of their call they should be charged with premeditated murder/manslaughter, or if they are injured - attempted at the very least.

2. Police should be confirming these cases and confirm hostiles before they just go in blasting, which means they need to be held accountable for their actions as well. There is literally no reason for that to happen. Lack of training, or lack of command.
Click to expand...

I agree with 1, but not 2. Most of the time, emergency situations call for rapid response, and rapid response means no time to confirm the situation. The police are caught in a no-win situation here. If they wait to confirm the situation, someone might bleed out, additional hostages get taken, or they might miss the opportunity to take out the bad guys, and then people will ask why the police didn't take action quick enough.

I will agree that there are a lot of cases of cops being trained to behave too aggressively, or aggressive people that should have never become cops. However, aggressive behavior does not equal quick action taken during an emergency situation.
 
DrLobotomy said:
This is some shit that really shouldn't be in the news even though the thought of that in and of itself is fucked up, because it will just give more dumbasses the idea to do it.

Damned if you tell and damned if you don't.
Click to expand...

There should be some type of alert for the police where if a call is rerouted through substations not local to area where the event is reported, that the police will immediately be notified of that fact. For example I have an internet home phone with 911 service. If you call 911 on it the police ask you what is your address and stuff because they are immediately notified that I don't have a traditional landline.
 
Swat has a history of being slightly aggressive when on scene anyway..

Ready for that alien ufo to anywhere
 
reFre5h said:
2. Police should be confirming these cases and confirm hostiles before they just go in blasting, which means they need to be held accountable for their actions as well. There is literally no reason for that to happen. Lack of training, or lack of command.
Click to expand...
Well at least now we know you did not read the accounts or watch the video of the scene.
 
It's a very short video unfortunately, it'd be nice to see a bit more context for the "he was given several commands" part.
 
If that's protocol, that falls on failure of command and training. It leads to too many questions, and cases similar to this are coming to light way more frequent than should EVER happen.

Why did they not even use loudspeakers to issue commands?


I'm sorry, as an Infantry veteran I find this completely absurd. We had STRICT ROE/RUF while in a warzone. And Police hardly attempt de-escalation in cases similar to this.
 
The scum that did this is thankfully likely to be in serious legal trouble. He tried to electronically conceal his identity in order to file a false report, that's a felony in Kansas. He falsely reported an imminent danger situation, that is also a felony. Someone died due to these felonies. If I'm reading Kansas law right that last bit means the prosecutors can push for a felony murder charge, which is an automatic life sentence in the state. That would be a fitting punishment I think.

As for the police: I don't think there were any right calls to make in this situation. The officer had to make a split second call and tragically it ended with the death of an innocent person. This really should serve as a catalyst for the department to re-examine their training and policies and to try and figure out ways to prevent this from happening again.
 
Derangel said:
The scum that did this is thankfully likely to be in serious legal trouble. He tried to electronically conceal his identity in order to file a false report, that's a felony in Kansas. He falsely reported an imminent danger situation, that is also a felony. Someone died due to these felonies. If I'm reading Kansas law right that last bit means the prosecutors can push for a felony murder charge, which is an automatic life sentence in the state. That would be a fitting punishment I think.

As for the police: I don't think there were any right calls to make in this situation. The officer had to make a split second call and tragically it ended with the death of an innocent person. This really should serve as a catalyst for the department to re-examine their training and policies and to try and figure out ways to prevent this from happening again.
Click to expand...


That's exactly my point. They were missing too many of the steps to fire.

What if it was an actual hostage situation and that person got sent out, or there was a real threat and someone was coming out of the house to that?

You are never excused to just shoot and figure it out later.

They didn't confirm ANYTHING.
 
Derangel said:
As for the police: I don't think there were any right calls to make in this situation. The officer had to make a split second call and tragically it ended with the death of an innocent person. This really should serve as a catalyst for the department to re-examine their training and policies and to try and figure out ways to prevent this from happening again.
Click to expand...
100% agree. This Swatting BS has been out of hands for years, putting many police and civilians lives in jeopardy. There needs to be a solution, and sadly, hopefully this helps push that solution forward.
 
Derangel said:
As for the police: I don't think there were any right calls to make in this situation.
Click to expand...

They went in charged for a situation that was not occurring. Though I still believe that they could mount non lethal weapons to their lethal ones and use those as first strike. I bet 100% of people would rather be tased or hit by a sand bag / rubber bullet than the real deal. If it was supposedly a hostage situation their negotiating skills need a lot of work.
 
Ripskin said:
They went in charged for a situation that was not occurring. Though I still believe that they could mount non lethal weapons to their lethal ones and use those as first strike. I bet 100% of people would rather be tased or hit by a sand bag / rubber bullet than the real deal. If it was supposedly a hostage situation their negotiating skills need a lot of work.
Click to expand...

The FN-303 is made for ranged Less-Than-Lethal options. We had people with rifles and people with LTL options, when you pick a rifle your only choice is to kill.
 
reFre5h said:
I'll concede he failed to follow, but since when is not following commands punishable by death?

And how were they sure he even heard the commands, they were yelling across the road with no loud speaker.
Click to expand...
The moment that you make the police feel like you are a threat to them or people around you.

Not sure, guess we will see if he was responding out not bet soon. The facts will come out.
 
The video the police released themselves shows only 6 seconds from command to shot. If they had better footage to show otherwise, why would they have not chose to release that instead?

Adrenaline drastically changes how your body perceives the world, unless you're trained to act under stress you will shut down.
 
reFre5h said:
2. Police should be confirming these cases and confirm hostiles before they just go in blasting, which means they need to be held accountable for their actions as well. There is literally no reason for that to happen. Lack of training, or lack of command.
Click to expand...
It has more to do with the attitude of many swat members.That they are trigger happy and too eager to shot someone in the face. Whenever they're called into action they feel this is their chance, this is the moment they've been training for years. Finally they can trample on someone. Let's be honest swat is not police, they aren't really equipped to analyze a situation rationally and come to the conclusion that the scrawny guy in pajamas is not a threat. They're like the bulldogs you send in after you confirmed the threat. I think the police chief who goes in swat first should be held accountable instead of the people they sent in. Whatever happened to investigation?
 
why didn't police trace the call?...don't they always do that?...they would have seen that the call was coming from California and not Kansas...even if he was spoofing his number doesn't law enforcement have means to accurately trace a phone location?
 
What in the mother fucking son blugrh. This broke my brain and had to rehear sections of the interview multiple times

It also sounds like he was bragging out doing it. Why else would he come out on twitter and take an interview? Plead his case? Listening to him trying to scramble for an answer at 7 minutes just. This isn't the first time someone swatted someone. And he does it for money. Taking payments over paypal.

Notable Quotes:

"I love swatting kids who think that nothing's going to happen."

"Police isn't going to catch me."

"I wasn't holding a gun and didn't shoot someone."

"I don't think that I should not do jail time. But I don't think I should get charged with murder."



I'm fucking done with the internet today. And those who are defending the swatter and if there's a swatter here on these forums. I hope that you turn your life around, because you're not only wasting money, you're putting people's lives at risk - for what? For the lulz? Grow the fuck up:

https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2015/...pparent-swatting-raid-homeowner-wont-charged/
http://www.newson6.com/story/278579...lice-chief-shot-school-canceled-due-to-threat

I hope they make an example out of this kid. He doesn't sound in the least bit apologetic about it from the interview. He's over 18. He should've known better. I can see a lawyer pleading that because he didn't have parents, he didn't have an upbringing to know better, despite his age.




Legal Corner

False Public Alarm: Source
This is a third degree offense with the potential for 3-5 years in New Jersey State Prison.

However, if the person created a false public alarm with more than just mere words but also by some physical action such as placing a fake bomb in a public place then the offense escalates to a second degree crime. The offense will also escalate to a second degree charge if another person was injured as a result of the false public alarm or if the false public alarm was created during a county, state or national emergency. If convicted of causing false public alarm in the second degree, there is a possibility of 5-10 years in prison.

Finally, if a person creates a false public alarm and as a result of the false public alarm, a death occurs, that person will be guilty of a crime of the first degree.

Even a fake or prank phone call to 9-1-1 can be considered a fourth degree crime which if convicted is punishable by up to 18 months in prison.
Click to expand...

Jail Times: Source
If someone pleads Guilty or is found Guilty of a criminal offense, the following is the statutory Prison/Jail terms.

NJSA 2C: 43-8 (1) In the case of a crime of the first degree, for a specific term of years which shall be fixed by the court and shall be between 10 years and 20 years;

a. (1) $200,000.00 when the conviction is of a crime of the first degree;
Click to expand...


Full Copy and Paste: Same Source
I'm saving you the click.

Jail for Crimes and Disorderly Conduct:

If someone pleads Guilty or is found Guilty of a criminal offense, the following is the statutory Prison/Jail terms.

NJSA 2C: 43-8 (1) In the case of a crime of the first degree, for a specific term of years which shall be fixed by the court and shall be between 10 years and 20 years;

(2) In the case of a crime of the second degree, for a specific term of years which shall be fixed by the court and shall be between five years and 10 years;

(3) In the case of a crime of the third degree, for a specific term of years which shall be fixed by the court and shall be between three years and five years;

(4) In the case of a crime of the fourth degree, for a specific term which shall be fixed by the court and shall not exceed 18 months.

2C:43-3 Fines have been increased recently! 2C:43-3. Fines and Restitutions. A person who has been convicted of an offense may be sentenced to pay a fine, to make restitution, or both, such fine not to exceed:

a. (1) $200,000.00 when the conviction is of a crime of the first degree;

(2) $150,000.00 when the conviction is of a crime of the second degree;

b. (1) $15,000.00 when the conviction is of a crime of the third degree;

(2) $10,000.00 when the conviction is of a crime of the fourth degree;

c. $1,000.00, when the conviction is of a disorderly persons offense;

d. $500.00, when the conviction is of a petty disorderly persons offense;
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
polonyc2 said:
why didn't police trace the call?...don't they always do that?...they would have seen that the call was coming from California and not Kansas...even if he was spoofing his number doesn't law enforcement have means to accurately trace a phone location?
Click to expand...
Who's to say he didn't spoof a local number (TFA did mention he called a call dispatch centre rather than 911 easier to spoof or some such?)
I believe you make a vpn'ed voip call to a internet to landline service to hide your tracks?
 
ChoGGi said:
Who's to say he didn't spoof a local number (TFA did mention he called a call dispatch centre rather than 911 easier to spoof or some such?)
I believe you make a vpn'ed voip call to a internet to landline service to hide your tracks?
Click to expand...

I guess I thought that law enforcement always had more sophisticated tracking techniques and would be able to accurately trace even spoofed numbers...the suspect first called some type of call center, got disconnected then 911 called him back...sad that even in 2017 it's so easy to trick police using these type of methods

I mean they obviously caught the swatter and arrested him fairly quickly so they do have the means to track spoofed numbers...question is why not trace the actual location sooner
 
Last edited:
socK said:
See recent stuff with the guy in the hallway.

Literally crying and pleading for his life. Shorts falling down as they have him crawl over. Reaches to grab them.

Dead.

Did he disobey the order? Yup.

But it's a heat of the moment scenario, accidentally doing something that in any normal circumstance is harmless and that you've probably done a thousand times during the course of your life with not a single second thought. Compound that with loaded firearms a trigger pull away from ending you, the constant yelling and threats, and the fact that you're already hysteric, and you have a sure fire recipe for disaster.
Click to expand...

guess you missed this other video


o-O; even when your flat on your back and hands up, you could still get shot....
 
Kyle you are defending something entirely undefendable, if it was a real hostage situation then the one opening would have been a hostage, with nerves it is entirely possible that he wouldn't have understood and followed the orders in those 6 seconds, then they would have shot and killed the hostage.

Also if it was a possible hostage situation you do not send the gun people in first, you send a farking mediator to descalate.
 
control your guns, this is just one in a thousand reasons to lower the overall threat risc.

sad for all involved but you are far from understanding from our point of view across the pond.

we just shake our heads of how you lost gun & threat control completly.
 
BitMaster said:
control your guns, this is just one in a thousand reasons to lower the overall threat risc.

sad for all involved but you are far from understanding from our point of view across the pond.

we just shake our heads of how you lost gun & threat control completly.
Click to expand...

What does gun control have to do with this situation?
 
Revdarian said:
Prava, you cannot suffer "withdrawal from not consuming pot" as pot doesn't generate biological addiction, unlike for example simple coffee.
Click to expand...

RogueTadhg said:
What does gun control have to do with this situation?
Click to expand...

Exactly, that's what I mean you don't even see why you need those SWAT's at all. If there weren't so many guns among the people for decades your overall gun related crimes would be significantly lower.

YOu would then likely never develop the need for such SWAT's that act like they do, which I understand in most scenrarios.


When such a thing happens in another country, like GB, CAN, FR, IT, ESP, your chances of surviving climb by like 10x I guess, just because those nations dont expect a shooting. You expect a shooting with every other 911 call, that's the reality.

YOu are so used to it, you dont consider it could and should be different, better. That is when you grow up in such a society, you see it as normal, but it isnt.
 
BitMaster said:
Exactly, that's what I mean you don't even see why you need those SWAT's at all. If there weren't so many guns among the people for decades your overall gun related crimes would be significantly lower.

YOu would then likely never develop the need for such SWAT's that act like they do, which I understand in most scenrarios.


When such a thing happens in another country, like GB, CAN, FR, IT, ESP, your chances of surviving climb by like 10x I guess, just because those nations dont expect a shooting. You expect a shooting with every other 911 call, that's the reality.

YOu are so used to it, you dont consider it could and should be different, better. That is when you grow up in such a society, you see it as normal, but it isnt.
Click to expand...


What was reported was that the father and mother had been shot. Father deceased, shot in the head. "Where" the gun came from isn't even a question for that moment. Yes, SWAT would be expecting someone with a gun (Source doesn't matter), and that's all they really care about - resolving the situation that also involved hostages. Gun control wouldn't fix this issue as the gun was imaginary.

You can still acquire a gun in any country. Germany, for example, you can't get a gun for "Self Defense". But you can for hunting, gun collecting, and sporting. But if the person who really wants a gun wants a gun I'm sure that person could get a hand gun, or otherwise using the dark web or going old school with face-to-face with those persons. Whose to say that the gun was acquired from other means?

“It was a shooting call involving hostages,” he said. “The original call, we were told someone had an argument with their mother and dad was accidentally shot. And now that person was holding mother, brother and sister hostage. We learned through that call that a father was deceased, and had been shot in the head. That was the information we were working off of.”
Click to expand...
Source
The take away I could garner is:
1. At least two shots fired. Two people shot. One deceased.
2. Three hostages, one injured.
 
Last edited:
I will say that I don't believe the swatter intended for the police to murder this guy...was a prank gone wrong...also why would the victim give out his actual home address??...I've been in online 'disputes' with butthurt kids before during competitive online gaming sessions where people would threaten to hack me, come to my house etc...I just laugh at their threats and dare them to do anything but I would never actually give out my real address...
 
"Due to the actions of a prankster, we have an innocent victim," Livingston says.“

No ... due to the actions of a poorly trained and trigger happy cop there is an innocent victim. One would hope a police chief would have more intelligence.
 
BitMaster said:
YOu would then likely never develop the need for such SWAT's that act like they do, which I understand in most scenrarios.
Click to expand...
Nah this type of thinking is nonsense. While policing is a dangerous job there are far more dangerous ones out there.

As of 2015 being a mechanic in the US is slightly more dangerous than being a cop, and being a logger is muuuch more dangerous and those guys have to deal with hunters and wackos who want them off "their" land all the time.

The issue with SWAT and police violence is training/social environment related and not gun ownership related. Many cops/SWAT are ex-military and the training they have isn't really appropriate for civilian policing. On top of that the cop/SWAT social environment encourages a "us vs them" attitude when it comes to cops/SWAT vs civilian rights and protections and they see those rights and protections as obstacles to be defeated rather than something to be respected.

Now gun violence would indeed go down with less gun ownership but trying to ban or greatly limit guns is a political 3rd rail that even the D's are starting to realize is a bad idea to step on. Realistically better mental health support services and screening would go a long long way to cutting down on gun violence in the US. That and requiring people to lock up their guns so their kids can't get at them. Which they're supposed to be doing anyways.
 
Draax said:
"Due to the actions of a prankster, we have an innocent victim," Livingston says.“

No ... due to the actions of a poorly trained and trigger happy cop there is an innocent victim. One would hope a police chief would have more intelligence.
Click to expand...

too many people are quick to blame the police in these type of situations...unless you've been in law enforcement or the military you have no idea what goes on in these type of situations...you need to make split second reactions to a variety of different circumstances...I'm actually surprised more innocent people are not killed and how much patience and restraint are shown in real life hostage or criminal situations
 
polonyc2 said:
too many people are quick to blame the police in these type of situations...unless you've been in law enforcement or the military you have no idea what goes on in these type of situations...you need to make split second reactions to a variety of different circumstances..
Click to expand...
You don't have to be a cop to see the video of the shooting, what happened is obvious.

Supposedly they're hired and trained for their ability to make split second decisions as part of their job.

Lets face it: they had no idea if the guy had a gun or not. Going by the video you can't see that well. They just assumed he had one and fired by default. And yeah the call in said there was shooting but so what? The SWAT guys know all about swatting these days. They couldn't check things out to make sure? Or at least wait until they, you know, actually saw a gun to start blasting?
 
polonyc2 said:
too many people are quick to blame the police in these type of situations...unless you've been in law enforcement or the military you have no idea what goes on in these type of situations...you need to make split second reactions to a variety of different circumstances...I'm actually surprised more innocent people are not killed and how much patience and restraint are shown in real life hostage or criminal situations
Click to expand...
So too many people are quick to blame police ... and yet the very first thing the police chief did was blame the swatter and take no responsibility for his officer shooting an unarmed innocent man.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top