> But why should the caller not be similarly liable? He should, he will, and I never meant to imply that he shouldn't. But the cop should to, yet probably won'

> But why should the caller not be similarly liable? He should, he will, and I never meant to imply that he shouldn't. But the cop should to, yet probably won't. That's a very wrong message to send to the other officers who struggle with accurate situation assessment and cold-headedness. Not to mention trigger-happy sociopaths. > The fake situation called in was so serious It's part of proper police work to assess the actual seriousness of the situation before escalating violence. Hostage-taking is a crime that actually exists, and police must be prepared to face it adequately. But SWATing is also a crime that actually exists, and police must also be prepared to face it adequately. In most other countries, there is a much stronger doctrine of trying to avoid violence escalation, and way fewer people are killed by police: guilty suspects, innocent suspects and collateral damages alike. One could be tempted to see a causality. > at least a manslaughter charge for both would be more than reasonable. Totally agree. And depending on whether the cop felt like "he's about to gun me!" or "I'm unsure, but if I shoot I can get away with it", it's either manslaughter or murder. We'll probably never know beyond reasonable doubt, so it can't go beyond manslaughter in practice.