11 ms·

I mean, is that 100% true?

anigbrowl 5y ago
Probably (by which I refer to the standard of judgement in the civil suit). https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/20/mcafee_25m_lawsuit_neighbor_death/ https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/20/mcafee_25m_lawsuit_ne...
- bennyp101 5y ago
  Ok. hand wavey Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? And he poisoned 4 dogs, people get rather angry about their pets. But yea, killing over it is extreme. Still, seems an odd thing to extradite him for. Maybe more to the story which we will never know.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - ska 5y ago
    > Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? The history of trying to define things like "torture" as what the "good guys" don't do has a long an storied past, none of it successful.
  - spacechild1 5y ago
    > Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? You know, a cop would taser you once for a few seconds. That poor guy got tasered repeatedly, including his genitalia. How is this not torture?
    - Miner49er 5y ago
      > You know, a cop would taser you once for a few seconds. Most of the time. Cops are known to torture people with tasers in the US by using them for long periods of time or repeatedly.
      - panopticon 5y ago
        And on the genitalia too. There was that Chicago police squad that tortured suspects with a cattle prod to the testicles to coerce confessions.
        spacechild1 5y ago
        Found an article: https://www.npr.org/2015/12/08/458926584/with-chicago-police-investigation-advocates-ask-what-took-so-long?t=1624494331618 https://www.npr.org/2015/12/08/458926584/with-chicago-police... That's just horrible...
  - cbsmith 5y ago
    > Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? You see a lot of Taser marks on people's genitals? Cops have used clubs for years, that doesn't mean you can't torture someone with a club.
- fastball 5y ago
  That was a default judgement, which means he automatically lost because he didn't show up to court, not on the merit of the suit.
  - 542354234235 5y ago
    No it doesn’t mean that. He didn’t automatically lose because he didn’t show up. The court, specifically the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, allowed the Faull estate to petition for a default judgement due to McAfee’s continued failure to respond and due to the merits of the case presented. They did not, and would not, allow a default judgment on a meritless case.
    - fastball 5y ago
      Meritless cases don't even make it that far (the court refuses to hear the case), so while true this seems like an unnecessary quibble. Yes, the suit had enough to actually be heard by a court, but the reason for the judgement is due to McAfee's refusal to even participate. Said another way: if McAfee had participated, this is not the judgement that would've been reached. McAfee may have still be found responsible by the court, but not for the same reason. It is certainly not the normal level of proof people take a court decision as being.
dnh44 5y ago
If I remember the story correctly the neighbour killed his dogs. That’s a pretty strong motive.
- Vadoff 5y ago
  John Wick agrees
  - ZephyrBlu 5y ago
    This makes me wonder if he was a source of inspiration for the movies...
- Razengan 5y ago
  Sounds like someone else with the same first name and motive.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  Actually, John killed his own dogs after he believed they were poisoned by his neighbor. Were they really poisoned, or was that just one of his psychotic delusions(like his claim that Belizean officials were out to kill him but killed Faull by mistake)? We'll never know. But we do know that his dogs were allowed to run free in a giant pack and attacked at least 6 people (probably more, but they may be locals and not ex-pats/tourists whose claims are more likely to be reported on)
  - cwkoss 5y ago
    He claimed that he gifted laptops to the Belizean government pre-loaded with spyware and alleged to have found evidence that multiple top officials were engaged in drug and human trafficking. If true, would certainly be a motive for those officials.
    - oh_sigh 5y ago
      Weird he never provided any proof of his claims about that. You would think that if he was invested enough to put his own life in risk(according to him) to find out the extent of corruption among officials in Belize, that he would, perhaps, release the information in some manner instead of just pretending like it never existed. And what was the thinking of the officials who allegedly received the laptops? "Oh no, the man who gave us free laptops has been reading everything we've done on these laptops. Let's plan his murder on these laptops now. Don't worry about finding his address, it's just some home north of San Pedro right? Just go kill a guy and it must be John"
ozten 5y ago
Even without being found guilty of murder... if you watch that documentary he hires very unsavory characters to be his armed guards 24x7. You are one of the richest people on the planet and you choose to be an armed bully on a small island with a lot of poverty to exploit. He could literally have any lifestyle he wanted.
- fastball 5y ago
  He hadn't been one of the richest people on the planet in more than a decade. Definitely did not have enough money for literally any lifestyle, especially seeing as it appears he owed a lot of money in back taxes.
  - FireBeyond 5y ago
    Had a net worth of several hundred million in a country where the cost of living was 23% of the US might not be a "megayacht and private 787" lifestyle, but it would do pretty well. He owed a lot of money in back taxes because he made a point of specifically refusing to pay them, not inability to do so.
    - fastball 5y ago
      His net worth peaked at $100M right before the 2008 financial crisis, which apparently decimated his investments. If you spend a lot of money without paying your taxes, you still owe those taxes, which means you have significantly less money than you think you do. So when his aforementioned wealth peaked at $100M, the real value (i.e. minus taxes) was probably much lower.
      - FireBeyond 5y ago
        Not withstanding the amount, I'm willing to be corrected there, but the latter part makes little sense: Say I have $1M in the bank (or in Bitcoin), but I owe the IRS say $300K. I leave the country, and take my money out of the reach of the IRS. My "net worth" on an accounting statement might be $700K, but if I'm making a point of avoiding and biting my thumb at the IRS, I still absolute have access to $1M, regardless of moneys owed or claimed. And if I have no intention of paying those taxes, I'm certainly going to use that money. And McAfee was very actively saying "I'm keeping that owed tax and doing whatever the hell I like with it".

Probably (by which I refer to the standard of judgement in the civil suit). https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/20/mcafee_25m_lawsuit_neighbor_death/ https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/20/mcafee_25m_lawsuit_ne...

bennyp101 5y ago
Ok. hand wavey Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? And he poisoned 4 dogs, people get rather angry about their pets. But yea, killing over it is extreme. Still, seems an odd thing to extradite him for. Maybe more to the story which we will never know.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ska 5y ago
  > Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? The history of trying to define things like "torture" as what the "good guys" don't do has a long an storied past, none of it successful.
- spacechild1 5y ago
  > Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? You know, a cop would taser you once for a few seconds. That poor guy got tasered repeatedly, including his genitalia. How is this not torture?
  - Miner49er 5y ago
    > You know, a cop would taser you once for a few seconds. Most of the time. Cops are known to torture people with tasers in the US by using them for long periods of time or repeatedly.
    - panopticon 5y ago
      And on the genitalia too. There was that Chicago police squad that tortured suspects with a cattle prod to the testicles to coerce confessions.
      - spacechild1 5y ago
        Found an article: https://www.npr.org/2015/12/08/458926584/with-chicago-police-investigation-advocates-ask-what-took-so-long?t=1624494331618 https://www.npr.org/2015/12/08/458926584/with-chicago-police... That's just horrible...
- cbsmith 5y ago
  > Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? You see a lot of Taser marks on people's genitals? Cops have used clubs for years, that doesn't mean you can't torture someone with a club.
fastball 5y ago
That was a default judgement, which means he automatically lost because he didn't show up to court, not on the merit of the suit.
- 542354234235 5y ago
  No it doesn’t mean that. He didn’t automatically lose because he didn’t show up. The court, specifically the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, allowed the Faull estate to petition for a default judgement due to McAfee’s continued failure to respond and due to the merits of the case presented. They did not, and would not, allow a default judgment on a meritless case.
  - fastball 5y ago
    Meritless cases don't even make it that far (the court refuses to hear the case), so while true this seems like an unnecessary quibble. Yes, the suit had enough to actually be heard by a court, but the reason for the judgement is due to McAfee's refusal to even participate. Said another way: if McAfee had participated, this is not the judgement that would've been reached. McAfee may have still be found responsible by the court, but not for the same reason. It is certainly not the normal level of proof people take a court decision as being.

dnh44 5y ago

If I remember the story correctly the neighbour killed his dogs. That’s a pretty strong motive.

Vadoff 5y ago
John Wick agrees
- ZephyrBlu 5y ago
  This makes me wonder if he was a source of inspiration for the movies...
Razengan 5y ago
Sounds like someone else with the same first name and motive.
oh_sigh 5y ago
Actually, John killed his own dogs after he believed they were poisoned by his neighbor. Were they really poisoned, or was that just one of his psychotic delusions(like his claim that Belizean officials were out to kill him but killed Faull by mistake)? We'll never know. But we do know that his dogs were allowed to run free in a giant pack and attacked at least 6 people (probably more, but they may be locals and not ex-pats/tourists whose claims are more likely to be reported on)
- cwkoss 5y ago
  He claimed that he gifted laptops to the Belizean government pre-loaded with spyware and alleged to have found evidence that multiple top officials were engaged in drug and human trafficking. If true, would certainly be a motive for those officials.
  - oh_sigh 5y ago
    Weird he never provided any proof of his claims about that. You would think that if he was invested enough to put his own life in risk(according to him) to find out the extent of corruption among officials in Belize, that he would, perhaps, release the information in some manner instead of just pretending like it never existed. And what was the thinking of the officials who allegedly received the laptops? "Oh no, the man who gave us free laptops has been reading everything we've done on these laptops. Let's plan his murder on these laptops now. Don't worry about finding his address, it's just some home north of San Pedro right? Just go kill a guy and it must be John"

ozten 5y ago

Even without being found guilty of murder... if you watch that documentary he hires very unsavory characters to be his armed guards 24x7. You are one of the richest people on the planet and you choose to be an armed bully on a small island with a lot of poverty to exploit. He could literally have any lifestyle he wanted.

fastball 5y ago
He hadn't been one of the richest people on the planet in more than a decade. Definitely did not have enough money for literally any lifestyle, especially seeing as it appears he owed a lot of money in back taxes.
- FireBeyond 5y ago
  Had a net worth of several hundred million in a country where the cost of living was 23% of the US might not be a "megayacht and private 787" lifestyle, but it would do pretty well. He owed a lot of money in back taxes because he made a point of specifically refusing to pay them, not inability to do so.
  - fastball 5y ago
    His net worth peaked at $100M right before the 2008 financial crisis, which apparently decimated his investments. If you spend a lot of money without paying your taxes, you still owe those taxes, which means you have significantly less money than you think you do. So when his aforementioned wealth peaked at $100M, the real value (i.e. minus taxes) was probably much lower.
    - FireBeyond 5y ago
      Not withstanding the amount, I'm willing to be corrected there, but the latter part makes little sense: Say I have $1M in the bank (or in Bitcoin), but I owe the IRS say $300K. I leave the country, and take my money out of the reach of the IRS. My "net worth" on an accounting statement might be $700K, but if I'm making a point of avoiding and biting my thumb at the IRS, I still absolute have access to $1M, regardless of moneys owed or claimed. And if I have no intention of paying those taxes, I'm certainly going to use that money. And McAfee was very actively saying "I'm keeping that owed tax and doing whatever the hell I like with it".