Tyler Barriss Pleads Guilty to 51 Charges

AlphaAtlas

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Staff member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
After being hit with a number of charges by the feds last month, notorious swatter Tyler Barriss entered guilty pleas to "count one (making a false report resulting in a death), count two (cyberstalking) and count 12 (conspiracy) of a superseding indictment" in a Witchita, Kansas court. Tyler was initially accused of accepting $1.50 to call in a fake hostage situation over a CoD match, which led to the death of 28-year-old Andrew Finch. However, Barriss previously pled guilty to a number of other crimes, including false bomb reports, fraud, and calls to various emergency services. Apparently, as part of his plea, he "admitted he got involved with" the two CoD players that paid for the call, who are already on trial themselves. Barriss is reportedly facing over 20 years in prison. Sentencing is set for Jan 30, and KTLA says that Barriss is facing "a separate January trial in Kansas on a charge of involuntary manslaughter."


"Without ever stepping foot in Wichita, the defendant created a chaotic situation that quickly turned from dangerous to deadly," U.S. Attorney Stephen McAllister said. "His reasons were trivial and his disregard for the safety of other people was staggering."
 
This is what happens when you grow up on the internet and you are unfamiliar with the concept of consequences. In the real world the people who get shot die and there is very little humorous muderdancing involved.

There are also millions of other memethinkers in the world right now, this is going to happen lots more.
 
Twisted Kidney said:
This is what happens when you grow up on the internet and you are unfamiliar with the concept of consequences. In the real world the people who get shot die and there is very little humorous muderdancing involved.

There are also millions of other memethinkers in the world right now, this is going to happen lots more.
Click to expand...
It is not going to stop it completely but thry need to make a example out of him. Maybe people will think twice about doing it. He needs th death penalty.
 
Rather than "making an example of him" and just throwing the problem away instead of dealing with the problem; why not use this as a way to study the problem and try to educate others. Given the proper evaluation, there could be a lot to be learned from the actions of someone who is seemingly so broken and out of touch with reality. Also, it could be a good example for people to stop giving in to immature reactions when they're online, rather than playing in to someone who is obviously being shitty, ignore them, or even better, tell them they're being shitty without insulting them; words can do a lot of good.

Don't get me wrong, I think people like this don't deserve to be wasting oxygen either, but, there's a better way to deal with it; most specifically, American society has decided the best option is to always (always may be a slight exaggeration, but it seems this way) ignore possible rationale or study and just ignore the root of the problem.
 
Im sure they will find out in jail, i feel like this is gonna come back around on him in more ways than one. Have fun in lock up for the rest of your life shit-stain, hopefully a lifetime ban on gaming.
 
Captindecisive said:
Rather than "making an example of him" and just throwing the problem away instead of dealing with the problem; why not use this as a way to study the problem and try to educate others. Given the proper evaluation, there could be a lot to be learned from the actions of someone who is seemingly so broken and out of touch with reality. Also, it could be a good example for people to stop giving in to immature reactions when they're online, rather than playing in to someone who is obviously being shitty, ignore them, or even better, tell them they're being shitty without insulting them; words can do a lot of good.

Don't get me wrong, I think people like this don't deserve to be wasting oxygen either, but, there's a better way to deal with it; most specifically, American society has decided the best option is to always (always may be a slight exaggeration, but it seems this way) ignore possible rationale or study and just ignore the root of the problem.
Click to expand...


I agree. Let them study him like a lab rat all they want...as long as he is locked behind a prison cell.

This guy should never be allowed near a keyboard with internet access or cell phone again.
 
kamxam said:
Study all you want, but there will be always people who will want to do this type of stuff for no more reason than they think "It will be fun". Intelligence for a large portion of this planet seems to be lacking somewhat nowadays. :cautious:
Click to expand...

Not nowadays, always. The difference now is that those people have a medium now, where they didn't just 20 years ago. We're simply seeing what has ALWAYS existed in society, hidden out of sight.
 
You would think the internet would make people smarter,,,, but nope :rolleyes: pretty much the opposite seem to be the case.
On the other hand i do not get why swat units would storm what i recon often are a unknown address housing people unknown to the law, and then come in guns blazing like it appear they must be.

Of course the fear mongering of other people "higher" up in society don't better this situation one bit, but hard for me to relate to as my society are so very different from the US on several points.
One can only hope a example are getting made with this guy, though that will probably not scare the most stupid ones out there.
 
I didnt read the article. He plead out. I wonder what the recommendation will be - maybe 20 years.
 
Captindecisive said:
Rather than "making an example of him" and just throwing the problem away instead of dealing with the problem; why not use this as a way to study the problem and try to educate others.
Click to expand...

Why not both? While not a panacea deterrence does also work on some. Nothing works on everyone, so there's nothing wrong with doing multiple things.
 
Oldmodder said:
On the other hand i do not get why swat units would storm what i recon often are a unknown address housing people unknown to the law, and then come in guns blazing like it appear they must be.
Click to expand...

What is the swat team supposed to do when they receive a report that people is being held at gunpoint and will likely be killed?
If the situation is real and they do nothing, then they get blamed for not saving the victims.

Meanwhile, the home owner hears people outside his home, hears someone trying the door knobs, and arms himself.
The Swat team breaks in and sees an armed person, just as reported and bad stuff happens.

This guy should be treated the same as if he broke into the house and pulled the trigger. He should be charged murder since he planned this situation and someone died.
 
From TFA, he pled to 3 counts in this court appearance. Wonder if part of the plea deal is testifying against the 2 players? He already admitted involvement with them.

Agree with the idea of a lifetime ban on connected computer use as part of the deal.
 
This guy is cancer for the online world
Ban him from all electronics forever....and maybe just let him watch seizure inducing videos for his stint in jail
 
vegeta535 said:
It is not going to stop it completely but thry need to make a example out of him. Maybe people will think twice about doing it. He needs th death penalty.
Click to expand...

Meh, the more executions a state or country has the higher the crime rate. If there was even a scrap of evidence to show it would work I'd string him up on the side of the road. Making life cheaper and cheaper just makes life cheaper and cheaper. The upside of smoking his ass is that he would never be able to do this again and he shows a lot of evidence of sociopathic behaviour. I'm kind of on the fence, we know that execution does nothing as a deterrent, but this retard dead is well and thoroughly deterred.

The biggest thing is that because it's so hard to fix a sociopath cops need to make it harder for sociopaths to use S.W.A.T. as a weapon. I know that's kind of "victim blaming" but we genuinely can't prevent bad people from wanting to do bad things so we need to make it harder for them do those bad things.
 
and because governmental immunity is so abused the law enforcement agency involved in the killing will most likely have no liability in the death.
 
Hang this guy and seriously punish the cops.

After that security guard doing his job got shot by a cop a few days ago it is now beyond apparent that all cops need serious retraining to avoid the death of innocents.
 
Keel haul the fucker.

TMCM said:
and because governmental immunity is so abused the law enforcement agency involved in the killing will most likely have no liability in the death.
Click to expand...

So you think they should have gone in with flowers and candy instead? They got a call that lead them to believe it was a very dangerous situation. A situation that calls for fast action. They made a call that this time was wrong but a lot of other times was right. If they hesitate they could be the dead ones...and the real suck of it? They have NO FUCKING WAY of telling in that short of a reaction time.
 
nutzo said:
What is the swat team supposed to do when they receive a report that people is being held at gunpoint and will likely be killed?
If the situation is real and they do nothing, then they get blamed for not saving the victims.

Meanwhile, the home owner hears people outside his home, hears someone trying the door knobs, and arms himself.
The Swat team breaks in and sees an armed person, just as reported and bad stuff happens.

This guy should be treated the same as if he broke into the house and pulled the trigger. He should be charged murder since he planned this situation and someone died.
Click to expand...

How about identify who a person is before you start shooting?

Why is it that the so called "peace officers" in this country have looser rules of engagement than the military?
 
pgdeaner said:
Doubt he could end up on death row, but life in prison with no chance of parole would work for me.
Click to expand...

Life in prison seems a bit excessive for what is essentially manslaughter. After all, what we had was disregard for the consequences, not outright murder.

His complete and utter defiance and lack of remorse bothered me though.

I think 10-20 years wouldn't be inappropriate, just from a layman's perspective. Leaning towards the higher end of the range due to how parole works.

I say this without any real knowledge about what the sentencing guidelines are for what he was actually charged with, though. It just sounds approriate to me.
 
damicatz said:
How about identify who a person is before you start shooting?
Click to expand...

Because they simply do NOT have the time. The officer charging into what is PRESUMED to be a HOSTILE situation becuase they were TOLD that has less than a second to decide if thats a weapon in your hand and even if it is if you are going to shoot him or not. Its simply insane for you to sit here comfortable behind your computer and pretend you can judge the stress of making that decision.

damicatz said:
Why is it that the so called "peace officers" in this country have looser rules of engagement than the military?
Click to expand...

Blame the politicians for putting a choke collar on the military.

Zarathustra[H] said:
Life in prison seems a bit excessive for what is essentially manslaughter. After all, what we had was disregard for the consequences, not outright murder.

His complete and utter defiance and lack of remorse bothered me though.

I think 10-20 years wouldn't be inappropriate, just from a layman's perspective. Leaning towards the higher end of the range due to how parole works.

I say this without any real knowledge about what the sentencing guidelines are for what he was actually charged with, though. It just sounds approriate to me.
Click to expand...

Its it really manslaughter though? He set up that situation knowing that it could kill the guy. Manslaughter implies it was an accident and that there was no malice involved. It sounds to me like there was definitely malice involved.
 
kju1 said:
Because they simply do NOT have the time. The officer charging into what is PRESUMED to be a HOSTILE situation becuase they were TOLD that has less than a second to decide if thats a weapon in your hand and even if it is if you are going to shoot him or not. Its simply insane for you to sit here comfortable behind your computer and pretend you can judge the stress of making that decision.
Click to expand...

Better a cop dies in the line of duty then an innocent civilian. Cops should not be allowed to discharge their firearm without visual evidence of an immediate threat to themselves or an innocent. The thinking that cops should open fire on the PRESUMPTION of danger is flat out wrong.

If cops can't handle IDing their targets before discharging their firearms, maybe they shouldn't be cops.
 
gamerk2 said:
Better a cop dies in the line of duty then an innocent civilian. Cops should not be allowed to discharge their firearm without visual evidence of an immediate threat to themselves or an innocent. The thinking that cops should open fire on the PRESUMPTION of danger is flat out wrong.

If cops can't handle IDing their targets before discharging their firearms, maybe they shouldn't be cops.
Click to expand...

Youve made the incorrect assumption that its always the cops life at stake and not a hostages or some other innocents...
 
gamerk2 said:
Better a cop dies in the line of duty then an innocent civilian. Cops should not be allowed to discharge their firearm without visual evidence of an immediate threat to themselves or an innocent. The thinking that cops should open fire on the PRESUMPTION of danger is flat out wrong.

If cops can't handle IDing their targets before discharging their firearms, maybe they shouldn't be cops.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree that we need much better control and training here, but it does makes sense to base this conversation on evidence.

The truth is that the real world is not Call of Duty. Humans, even highly trained ones have fear responses, and when they do they do not make good decisions, especially when simultaneously under extreme time pressure. I don't have time to search for the research papers I've seen in the past on this subject. The synopsis essentially is that in order to avoid this jittery fear response you need years of specialty training in order to commit everything to muscle memory and bypass the fear response. Additionally, the effect is only temporary. Ideally these things should be drilled multiple times a week. Evidence has shown that even after only a month without drills, the effect has worn off significantly enough to render the training mostly ineffective.

This training is beyond what it is feasible to give every single street cop. No problem right? That's why we have SWAT teams. Indeed, that IS why we have SWAT teams. They drill this stuff constantly, and are the appropriate professionals to call during an active shooter scenario. And this is what we used to do. If you have a terrorist, or active shooter scenario, the street cops secure the perimeter and wait for the SWAT team to come in and use their highly specialized training to neutralize the threat. There's only one problem with this. Ever since Columbine this approach has been changed. The public and politicians deemed - and rightly so - that if you have an active shooter in a building actively killing people, this is not the time to be securing the perimeter and waiting for the professionals. Whoever is first on site needs to get in there and do their best to stop the assailant with whatever resources they have on hand.

So, this leaves us with a problem.

1.) We have highly trained professionals who are adequately trained to do this sort of thing, but they cannot regularly be the first on site.

2.) We have street cops who we know have inadequate training for the task at hand, and who can never be adequately trained and still be street cops, because the training would becomes their time job.

So what do we do? I don't have the answer. What we are doing right now seems to be making the best of what we have and hoping for the best. Street cops may not be Mr. Right for the job, but they are Mr. Right Now, and when people are being shot (or potentially shot, as you cannot know what the situation is when they are arriving on the scene) you need Mr. Right Now. This solution isn't perfect, but I don't know what the alternative is. Not having non-SWAT cops respond doesn't seem like it is an option. I do know that repeatedly putting cops in a life and death situation for which we know based on scientific studies they could never be adequately prepared seems very unfair to them, and because of this mistakes WILL happen, and I am not convinced at all that they are to blame.

What is clear to me is that we probably need to do as much as possible to prevent these situations from happening in the first place. Fund mental health services that can catch troubled people before they start killing. Tighter control on who gets to have firearms. Prosecution and better education of would-be pranksters so police don't have to respond for no reason.

As always, there is much more nuance to this situation than most would really like to portray.
 
I wonder if the infrastructure exists for such calls to be geolocated in time to determine if, for example, someone on a cell phone in California is calling with an "emergency" about a house in Kansas.

Dispatchers wouldn't be able to say definitively "this is a hoax" and withhold the SWAT team, but if something seemed suspect they could at least inform the first responders that the situation may not be genuine.
 
Twisted Kidney said:
Meh, the more executions a state or country has the higher the crime rate. If there was even a scrap of evidence to show it would work I'd string him up on the side of the road. Making life cheaper and cheaper just makes life cheaper and cheaper. The upside of smoking his ass is that he would never be able to do this again and he shows a lot of evidence of sociopathic behaviour. I'm kind of on the fence, we know that execution does nothing as a deterrent, but this retard dead is well and thoroughly deterred.

The biggest thing is that because it's so hard to fix a sociopath cops need to make it harder for sociopaths to use S.W.A.T. as a weapon. I know that's kind of "victim blaming" but we genuinely can't prevent bad people from wanting to do bad things so we need to make it harder for them do those bad things.
Click to expand...

The problem with "death row" nowadays is that the people that are there generally stay on there for 20+ years.

3 hots and a cot for 20+ years doesn't seem like much of a deterrent. If somebody gets sent to jail they don't have to have a job or pay bills, etc. They just get to suck the teet of the taxpayers for as long as they are in there.
 
nutzo said:
What is the swat team supposed to do when they receive a report that people is being held at gunpoint and will likely be killed?
Click to expand...

Yeah that do sound serious, and thankfully something we rarely see here in Denmark ( maybe once every 10 years or so for actual hostage / murder situations ) i cant recall we have had a single case of swatting, though we Danes can muster many gamers, and for sure don't have a smarter youth than any other country.
But couldn't the swat team just phone some seconds ahead and ask "really" ? or maybe ring the doorbell.
I know that probably sound far fetched in many a American ears, but as i said i am from another place that don't have that particular issue ( though it would seem like the gang war and consequent shootings over the drug market have picked up again )

But swat saying " we are coming like it or not" at least should give innocent occupants a chance of preparing, and not hold anything in their hands when they come thru the door.
And if there actually are a situation, well it should be contained at that time, i am not asking for swat to call minutes in advance giving a perp the chance to run.

And believe it or not, i actually wished we Danes had the same gun laws the Americans have, i am as far from a gun phobic ex hippie as you can get.

Actually if you want to get to the top in a game like CS, you will have to fight your way thru some fierce Danish teams to get to the top.
 
Oldmodder said:
But swat saying " we are coming like it or not" at least should give innocent occupants a chance of preparing, and not hold anything in their hands when they come thru the door.
And if there actually are a situation, well it should be contained at that time, i am not asking for swat to call minutes in advance giving a perp the chance to run.
Click to expand...

Thats actually the exact reason why they dont call ahead. If you call ahead and give them time to prepare the situation gets a whole lot more dangerous. Hostages might get killed, the perps might start shooting the moment they see the police rather than being shocked at their entry.

Generally no knock entries are a very rare thing and performed only in very specific circumstances. One is exigent circumstance (911 calls are treated as exigent circumstances under the belief that its an emergency line to be only used for such situations). That means the police have to have a reasonable belief that someones life is at risk if they do not immediately enter. Another is if they are chasing a perp and that perp goes into their home and closes the door (or any building public or private) then the police may follow. The last one (besides being invited in) is if they get a no knock warrant from a judge. That is typically if they believe announcing their presence will enable the perp to destroy evidence of a crime and the judge has accepted the risk that people can get hurt.
 
kju1 said:
Youve made the incorrect assumption that its always the cops life at stake and not a hostages or some other innocents...
Click to expand...

Considering at this point it was an innocent that died, your argument is moot.

Identify first, shoot second.
 
Captindecisive said:
Rather than "making an example of him" and just throwing the problem away instead of dealing with the problem; why not use this as a way to study the problem and try to educate others. Given the proper evaluation, there could be a lot to be learned from the actions of someone who is seemingly so broken and out of touch with reality. Also, it could be a good example for people to stop giving in to immature reactions when they're online, rather than playing in to someone who is obviously being shitty, ignore them, or even better, tell them they're being shitty without insulting them; words can do a lot of good.

Don't get me wrong, I think people like this don't deserve to be wasting oxygen either, but, there's a better way to deal with it; most specifically, American society has decided the best option is to always (always may be a slight exaggeration, but it seems this way) ignore possible rationale or study and just ignore the root of the problem.
Click to expand...
Nope, I prefer swift trial and conviction followed by quick appeal and then the appropriate sentencing..

those of you making excuses for this perp should be ashamed of yourselves.
 
YeuEmMaiMai said:
Nope, I prefer swift trial and conviction followed by quick appeal and then the appropriate sentencing..

those of you making excuses for this perp should be ashamed of yourselves.
Click to expand...

How can you ever hope for society to get better if you're not willing to address a problem instead of bypassing it and just throwing it away?

I agree that he deserves to be behind bars, but that can't be the end of it. That's why these problems continue to happen; you throw them behind bars, then the problem just sits there, bypassed and without study for clues or evidence that could help in the future. Not saying this won't happen, or doesn't happen, but likely not enough.

Whether it was meant for me or not; I'm not making excuses for him. As I said, my personal opinion is that he shouldn't be wasting oxygen any longer, but I can see outside my personal ideologies and want the problem to get better. The problem never gets better if it continues to be ignored.
 
VanGoghComplex said:
I wonder if the infrastructure exists for such calls to be geolocated in time to determine if, for example, someone on a cell phone in California is calling with an "emergency" about a house in Kansas.

Dispatchers wouldn't be able to say definitively "this is a hoax" and withhold the SWAT team, but if something seemed suspect they could at least inform the first responders that the situation may not be genuine.
Click to expand...
The police were aware this particular call did not route through 911 but instead was transferred from a city hall after-hours civilian line (and the story changed from the 1st call to the 2nd). Left unexplained in the articles (that a lot of commenters in this thread seem unaware of) are how that information didn't make it to the responding officers, why the responding officers didn't wait for a SWAT response, and why it was escalated from an eyes on target to active shooter response.

Anyway, these kind of overturned responses to perceived dangers didn't start with Columbine (which also doesn't explain why similar atrocities happen in the streets and not just in E calls), but rather with the vilification of certain communities during the 80's War on Drugs and a great many conversations about the "militarization" of our civil police force has been the topic of debate for the better part of 50 years now. Columbine did prompt FBI to reconsider how they approach "active shooter" situations and implement training to recalibrate their response with realities, but this wasn't an active shooter call nor were the officers specially trained in rapid response.
 
VanGoghComplex said:
I wonder if the infrastructure exists for such calls to be geolocated in time to determine if, for example, someone on a cell phone in California is calling with an "emergency" about a house in Kansas.
Click to expand...

Nope. Our phone systems are ridiculously insecure.

If instead of swatting people, people were committing mass toll fraud the phone companies might be interested in fixing the underlying problems with the phone switching protocols but I wouldn't hold my breath. Heck when's the last time you paid by the minute for long distance? Add VOIP providers into the mix - and anyone can hook a SIP to Analog box up anywhere - and it's pretty freaking hard after the fact to trace stuff down, never mind in real time.

If only it were as easy as a TV or movie :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top