19 ms·

The Facebook Comment That Ruined a Life

353 points by jborden13 13y ago

pgsandstrom 13y ago
> When a person writing under the profile name "Hannah Love" responded with "i hope you [burn] in hell you fucking prick," Actually the comment was "i hope you fucking bring in hell you fucking prick". That is a pretty significant difference.
- darklajid 13y ago
  English as a second language. The former makes sense, i.e. I can parse that. The latter causes me to stutter and look confused when I read that. Explain? Difference and meaning of the latter version? I ignore the whole 'went to jail for a random FB comment' crap. That's just sad but not surprising any more.
  - pgsandstrom 13y ago
    "i hope you fucking bring in hell" is meant as "I hope you give them hell".
    - vacri 13y ago
      "I hope you give them hell you fucking prick"? I don't think so. It's just a garden-variety wrong-word typo. I often make them, as do plenty of others.
    - rosser 13y ago
      You have no definitive proof of that, and I think your assertion is as laughably specious as the prosecution's in this case.
      - adventured 13y ago
        And I think that's exactly the point being made.
  - legohead 13y ago
    "bring in hell" could mean they are supporting him in his endeavor, ie. give(bring) them hell! but the "fucking prick" part kind of negates that idea.
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    Native US English. "I hope you burn in hell" is normal. The comment as written, "I hope you bring in hell you fucking prick", is nonsense. If someone asked me what it meant, I'd be confused, but I wouldn't assume that "bring" was a typo for "burn".
    - DanBC 13y ago
      I'd assume it was an autocorrect error.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- ars 13y ago
  I'm reasonably sure that bring is a typo for burn. I mean yes, the way it was written is a valid sentence, but it's an odd one. Assuming a typo makes much more sense, especially with the concluding insult.
hmsimha 13y ago
While they're at it why not arrest every musician, poet, and writer who ever penned dark or violent writing.
- Cthulhu_ 13y ago
  There's a notable difference between writing a book and publishing an announcement that you're going to go on a killing spree. The former is relatively benign, the latter has far too often been done right before a killing spree. The former is done over time, in relative peace; the latter is done in the spur of the moment. It's like writing the Anarchist's Cookbook about how to make a bomb, and writing a tweet about how you're going to plant a bomb in Boston in a couple minutes. The latter is a direct threat and requires immediate action. Most of the time, it's too late even for that. Personally, this dude should've known better and restrain his impulsive internet lulz behavior.
  - vdaniuk 13y ago
    >the latter has far too often been done right before a killing spree. Basic Bayesian approach to probability tells us that this metric of predicting violent events is counter-productive due to a great number of false positives.
  - hmsimha 13y ago
    This man's facebook post alone, and especially absent of any kind of access to a gun, are no grounds to assume any actual intent to cause physical harm. Far from it, I would say artists who have a history of violent confrontation, write/sing/rap about stabbing, shooting, or otherwise assaulting other people, and actually are in possession of weapons they could use to do so, could be assumed by any reasonable person to be more guilty of actually having an intent, or at least an overzealous willingness, to cause harm to others.
  - darkarmani 13y ago
    > Personally, this dude should've known better and restrain his impulsive internet lulz behavior. Obviously, you've never played any online games.
billyjobob 13y ago
Wow, I didn't realise US police were that bad. After reading this I don't think I could ever feel safe enough to visit the US. Sounds like you'd have a better chance of getting justice in an African dictatorship where at least the dont-rape-me bribe would be affordable. Tourists really should be warned about this, because it's not the image the US tourist boards present to us at all.
- zacinbusiness 13y ago
  Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, North and South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia - fear these places.
  - ItendToDisagree 13y ago
    Any state south of the Mason-Dixon line is portrayed as a cartoonish land of religious fanatics, racism, and overreaction. In truth it is not exactly so, but I personally wouldn't want to live in any of those places. I probably wouldn't be happy living in the mid-west either though. It generally holds true that these sorts of things can happen in any state now. If you 'threaten' to shoot up a school (no matter how jokingly) you're likely to get reamed for it. Context no longer matters... There is a zero tolerance policy on certain words and ideas now it appears.
    - zacinbusiness 13y ago
      I've lived in the south my whole life. It's a hell hole of backwards racism, fear. I stay here for my family and my wife's job. But it's hard.
    - nervousvarun 13y ago
      Lived in the south my entire life (currently in Nola). There's definitely an I don't know...afterglow effect? with this stereotype at play in the south today. It certainly used to be highly isolated culture with it's own weird problems ("fanatics, racism, and overreaction"). These days though thanks to television, the internet, decades of immigration etc. it's pretty much the rest of the US...with better weather.
StavrosK 13y ago
Is he charged with anything? I only saw a reference to a "terrorist threat", what kind of fucked up country is one that gets you ten years in jail for joking about committing a crime? Don't you actually have to commit the crime to go to prison, usually?
- kevingadd 13y ago
  Outside the internet, death threats are serious business and usually a crime, regardless of whether you have the actual intent or ability to kill someone. Likewise there's that tired old example of yelling fire in a crowded theater (though i don't think that applies here)
  - spacemanmatt 13y ago
    On or off the internet, an alleged death threat is subject to considerations of actual intent. Following up a comment with "lol/jk" as he ACTUALLY DID pretty much deflates all the billowy claims of his death threat. But that is conveniently omitted in popular reporting.
  - dTal 13y ago
    Wasn't the "crowded theater" analogy originally conceived to support the passage of the Espionage Act in America? It might be tired and old now, but was never even legit to begin with.
  - vezzy-fnord 13y ago
    Likewise there's that tired old example of yelling fire in a crowded theater What most people misunderstand about that is that it is okay to yell fire in a crowded theater, provided that a fire actually exists. Doesn't really apply here, but I've met plenty of people who interpret it literally as "Don't yell fire under any circumstances at all."
- zacinbusiness 13y ago
  Not at all. Thousands of innocent people at sitting in our jails as we speak. Most of them will never be free. But that's beside the point. He's not in prison, he's in jail, and there's a big difference. Depending on the circumstances, you could sit in jail your whole life while you await some technical process to complete. You don't even have to be charged with anything.
cinskiy 13y ago
Well nobody today thinks twice about posting something on the internet, especially youth, and while they should, it's still OK, because it's the way social messaging and posting works, and everybody else should be more or less OK with that too. 10 years for trolling is way over the top, just fine him already and let him go.
- spacemanmatt 13y ago
  Fine him for what? He has been convicted of nothing.
- andrelaszlo 13y ago
  Just rape him already and let him go.
  - adwf 13y ago
    Quite. I'm always shocked that people make jokes about this in American TV shows and movies. As if raping men on top of their prison sentence is somehow "justice" that they deserve. It's horrific.
- girvo 13y ago
  He's already been raped in prison. The case should be thrown out, and he should be awarded compensation. No fines.
  - yungether 13y ago
    http://youtu.be/Ypcs4c7ihSo?t=1m27s http://youtu.be/Ypcs4c7ihSo?t=1m27s
ryanatkn 13y ago
Not sure why this article doesn't include a seemingly important detail, but it was widely reported that Justin ended his comments with "LOL" and "JK". Mens rea indeed.
dirktheman 13y ago
I think anyone agrees that this whole situation has been blown out of proportion on a massive scale. But threatening to shoot up a school, in the light of recent events... really? What if he actually DID shoot up a school, and afterwards people discovered that authorities WERE warned? People need to realize that what you post on the internet can be interpreted different than what you actually meant. Besides, threatening with an act of terrorism is never funny, and always a bad idea. My El Al (Israeli airline) flight was delayed once because some prankster thought it was funny to say 'I have a bomb' to the flight attendant while boarding. He was thrown in jail and had to pay for delaying the flight. In this case, the punishment doesn't fit the crime. I do wish people would think twice before making threats as a joke, though.
- jpttsn 13y ago
  > Besides, threatening with an act of terrorism is never funny, and always a bad idea. That's a little narrow-minded. I can easily imagine scenarios where it's funny and/or a fairly good idea.
  - dirktheman 13y ago
    I stand corrected. Achmed the dead terrorist was hilarious!
    - ItendToDisagree 13y ago
      Anything can be funny. If you want a perfect example (regarding rape, something widely held to be not funny) look up the George Carlin rape bit. It doesn't matter what the subject is. Anything can be funny.
      - dirktheman 13y ago
        That made me laugh, proving your right. As with all jokes, timing is key, though!
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
MojoJolo 13y ago
This is disturbing. They arrest the guy and sentenced to ten years in jail with just a screenshot of a Facebook comment as a starting evidence. It's kinda puzzling to me why didn't they manage to check the whole thread? I think it's simple enough and contacting Facebook for it is not needed. What's the topic of the thread? We don't know. Edit: Let's also not disregard the fact that the screenshot can be all made up. They can't find the thread. Maybe it was edited, or created through Photoshop. I think it's fairly easy.
- corresation 13y ago
  They arrest the guy and sentenced to ten years in jail with just a screenshot of a Facebook comment as a starting evidence. I don't believe he has been sentenced to anything. He was given an offer of 10 years probation, which his lawyer bizarrely spouts off against as if deals are not the common actions in the justice system. In any case, he confessed to what was stated, and despite the spin now that it was a false confession, in earlier versions of reports about this he freely admitted that he said what he said...but that he purportedly followed it up later by an lol that made it all okay. It is actually interesting seeing how people sway in opinion about things. In the whole Flappy Bird fiasco, many were calling for the heads of those who "threatened the life" of the author, even though the threats were almost universally clearly absurd or satirical. Yet in this case it is an outrage that the police followed up on threats against children (shortly after Sandy Hook), and then when they discovered a confluence of concerning behaviors (suicide threats, restraining orders, bizarre behavior) they pursued actual charges. Should people be raped in jail? Of course they shouldn't. No criminal should. Though it's interesting that many on here believe that he is not like those other criminals, when the jails are stuffed with non-violent offenders who likewise shouldn't face sexual assaults. Should people face absurd sentences about thought crimes? Of course not. But what you say matters. Words have consequences. This whole fallback on some rote "Freedom of Speech!" thing is devolving from a civilized behavior. EDIT: I see that we're not looking for a rational, mature discussions. More of a rah rah rah mass outrage.
  - chc 13y ago
    Oh, don't be such a martyr. Sometimes the fault is your own. In this case, your description of the course of events displays a good understanding of what happened, and yet you present it in a way that is quite deceptive. If you want a better response, try being more even-handed. > In any case, he confessed to what was stated, and despite the spin now that it was a false confession, in earlier versions of reports about this he freely admitted that he said what he said...but that he purportedly followed it up later by an lol that made it all okay. This reminds me of a courtroom scene in My Cousin Vinny. Upon being told that he was being charged for the murder of the sheriff, one of the main characters exclaims in disbelief, "What?! I shot the sheriff?!" And then in trial, the prosecutor asks him, "Did you not tell police, 'I shot the sheriff'?" That movie was a comedy, but you're seriously trying to make this argument. You're acting like a silly parody of a prosecutor. Agreeing upon the words used does not mean this guy "confessed." And yes, the fact that it wasn't actually a threat does make it OK. Why wouldn't it? What interest does the law have in punishing people who aren't actually issuing threats? Should Alan Rickman be afraid of punishment for all the villainous lines he's delivered on camera?
nopassrecover 13y ago
> Until that point, his only brush with the law was a temporary restraining order two years earlier. > "He started threatening me, saying that he would kill me. ... I told the school officers, [and] they started watching him really closely. He would say that he would shoot up the school." So I'll start by playing Devil's Advocate very briefly. It's interesting how facts can be shaped with different language ("his only brush with the law"): it appears the restraining order from two years prior related to similar threats to those alleged in the Facebook comments (although in a remarkably different context). Now that notwithstanding, it seems there are many glaring issues, both ethical and legal, with the way this has been handled. Based on a screenshot of a Facebook comment without context or verification from Facebook an 18 year-old was detained for months without trial, including his 19th birthday, and offered a plea bargain of 8 years jail (!). An unaffordable bail of $500k was set, and if not for media attention, pro bono counsel, and a generous anonymous donor he would still be detained. During his detention he was repeatedly sexually assaulted, withheld legal counsel, and coerced to confess with false promises of freedom. After media focus an offer of 10 years (!) probation was put forward. On a technical note, the original warrant included false testimony (matching of the Facebook profile picture to a driver's licence when the accused did not have a licence) and the indictment misquoted the original Facebook comment. How does anyone think this is reasonable?
- jessedhillon 13y ago
  Important to point out, re the restraining order, that according to the article he wasn't given the opportunity to respond to the charges made against him. Restraining orders aren't convictions, I am surprised that it seems they can be used as evidence given that they apparently do not imply any finding of fact.
  - spacemanmatt 13y ago
    In a witch hunt, a lack of evidence implies a cover-up. A piece of non-evidence becomes a smoking gun. We've lost our heads.
- Fasebook 13y ago
  Because I'm scared.
spacemanmatt 13y ago
WIDELY MISREPORTED. Austin resident here. There is very little right about this case. He was joking, and his original post included indications of this. Prosecutors intentionally misrepresented and truncated his comments to mislead the Grand Jury. The arrest warrant issued claimed they found him by driver's license records but he has never had a Texas driver's license. They failed to protect him, an 18 year old kid, in jail. He has been sexually assaulted. The state maintains their case against him at this point only to blunt his eventual lawsuit against them.
- tbastos 13y ago
  I hope the kid wins a shitload of money in a lawsuit against the state... and the cops get punished. Now what's the chance of this happening?
  - rmc 13y ago
    I don't get it, I thought the USA was a massive litigation centre and you could sue people for millions left right and centre? Are you saying that you can't sue people like that?
    - beachstartup 13y ago
      i'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but suing people takes time and money, something most people don't have a lot of.
      - dm2 13y ago
        Many lawyers will work for a contingency fee if they feel you have a strong case.
    - mjklin 13y ago
      I believe tbastos believes that there is little chance the police will be punished. The kid absolutely will bring, and win, a lawsuit if the parent comment is true.
    - 13y ago
sheetjs 13y ago
Out of curiosity: if someone hacked this kid's account and posted those comments, and if the legal system is considering the Facebook comments to be his words, what recourse does he have? How does he demonstrate that the speech wasn't his?
- Tohhou 13y ago
  What about someone who creates an account, picks a name of a victim, uploads a picture, and then sends threats to others on their victim's behalf.
- DanBC 13y ago
  I'm guessing this is just one more eeason that you don't say anything until you have a lawyer.
  - pbhjpbhj 13y ago
    What do you do when you're in custody and the police deny you access to your lawyer as appears to be the case here. Or moves you and provides a puppet lawyer, as also appears to be the case here. Or simply incarcerate you without charge for an extended period as also seems to be the case here. Do you keep quite when those incarcerating you [by action or inaction] set you up to be raped. At what point do you give in and say anything to try and make it stop? If USA has an actual justice system that cares for due process I can't see how anyone involved in these actions can retain a position of any authority within that system.
    - iopq 13y ago
      You still don't admit any fault or guilt! It never helps. They only have you admit things to put you in prison. There is no other reason. "Proving" you're innocent to the cop is not admitted in court anyway. Admitting you're guilty to the cop is.
  - noptic 13y ago
    Did your lawyer approve this comment?
DanBC 13y ago
For the people who think that this kind of direct threat needs a punishment: what would be suitable?
- spacemanmatt 13y ago
  His constitutional right to a speedy trial would have been suitable, instead he was sexually assaulted before he got bailed out by an anonymous donor. Texas owes this poor guy.
- spacemanmatt 13y ago
  First of all, 'people' do not get to decide whether this is a direct threat that needs punishment. Judges of laws make that call. We have rules for a reason. The police broke them and this accused kid is suffering for it. There is no justification for putting him in jail just because someone thought they might feel threatened. There were multiple breakdowns in the legal system that should have protected him from illegal arrest and prosecution but comments like this make it seem ok to turn a blind eye. He's never been convicted of anything. Why the rush to punish?
  - DanBC 13y ago
    I'm ignoring all the pre-conviction stuff. It's boring because it is blindingly obvious that people should have access to a humane legal system. The more interesting discussion, to me, is "assume 'Bob' makes a clear and direct threat of violence against a school, and is found guilty in a fair trial. Should 'Bob' receive punishment, and if so what?"
- dirktheman 13y ago
  A mandatory field trip to Sandy Hook and a sit-down with one of the parents would be nice.
- zimpenfish 13y ago
  I'd rate "being a dumbass insensitive asshat" as "about 20 hours of community service".
blueskin_ 13y ago
Welcome to the police state.
D9u 13y ago
The Comal County District Attorney's Office did not intend for Carter to suffer what happened next, Flanary says, but it was reasonably foreseeable: He was sexually assaulted. The fact that prisoners are commonly subject to sexual assault, and that this consequence is trotted out as an acceptable deterrent to crime, illustrates just how uncivilized the US prison-industrial-complex is in this, the year 2014. Failure to protect vulnerable and, or, weaker inmates from other inmates shows negligence on the part of the government. This is completely unacceptable as it constitutes cruel & unusual punishment, and is yet another blatant disregard for the rights of We the People. Then there's the fact that the context of the offensive speech was excluded from evidence. Disgusting!
- Xdes 13y ago
  Prison in the US isn't about rehabilitation it's about punishment. No one goes to prison thinking they're going to come out as a better person with a new outlook on life. They're going to come out war-torn and barely above functional with little to no prospects.
  - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
    This is exactly why the stories of people that do come out a better person (got a degree, found religion, etc) make the "news". No body talks much about the other 99% that just come out more pissed at the world than before they went in.
  - markus2012 13y ago
    Little to no prospects: right, because punishment doesn't stop when you leave prison. Punishment continues until the day you die: you can't get a good job because virtually no one will hire an ex-con.
    - WalterBright 13y ago
      And that's not just because employers are bad people - it's the propensity of people to sue and win against the employers if an employee commits a crime. The employer is even further liable if he knew the employee was an ex-con.
chris-martin 13y ago
This headline is sickening. Comal County criminal prosecutors ruined this man's life.
- therobot24 13y ago
  Facebook in the headline gets readers, usually i would agree that using the name to spread the words is heinous, but the crimes against this kid are worse
bromagosa 13y ago
«Flanary believes it's paramount that if someone is criminally charged on the basis of his words, a jury needs to see all the words.» Wait, but shouldn't the case be that noone can be charged on the basis of his words?
- chilldream 13y ago
  Actual threats, stalking, and intimidation do exist. The problem here isn't that threats don't happen, it's that anyone with half a brain can see that this conversation wasn't a serious threat.
stefantalpalaru 13y ago
All this because of an image that looks like a screenshot? Wait 'till 4chan gets a wind of this...
girvo 13y ago
Every single person who is complicit in the mental and physical (he was raped in prison, people -- and the fact that some believe that prison rape is part of the punishment need their effing head checked) trauma should be fired. Disgusting. The fact that they don't even have the context of what was said, and yet they're still trying to hit him with a felony is beyond ludicrous. I'm honestly awestruck that a prosecutor could think that this is a trophy they want to earn. Funnily enough, situations like this (and the various ethical issues) are the reason I decided to leave my law degree. I can't reconcile my own morals and ethics with the reality of the justice system.
- dTal 13y ago
  And yet, if no one with ethics had the stomach for law, how could we expect an ethical justice system? It's same problem as with politics.
nebulous1 13y ago
> Carter's comments were part of a duel between dorks, and may have had something to do with a game with strong dork appeal called League of Legends. I actually laughed out loud at this. Is the Dallas Observer a rag or does the word 'dork' seem less ridiculous to people from Texas or the US?
- MarkTee 13y ago
  I had the same reaction (I'm from Canada).
- ChrisClark 13y ago
  It might be? One of the quotes has a lawyer saying 'bonkers'. I just assumed the language used there is a bit different.
w_t_payne 13y ago
The law has to be applied uniformly. If we prosecute one individual for a particular act, we have to prosecute all individuals who perform such acts. We clearly have, as a society, the means to make this happen, so then, why don't we? It seems that we are abandoning the principles that guide the rule of law here.
yaccz 13y ago
Internet adage reflecting the idea that without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
jheriko 13y ago
is there any evidence in this case which should be admissable in a court of law? i might eb exaggerating - i mean i think they got the right guy, but i see nothing here which is a good enough quality of 'evidence' for legal purposes, and i am not even a lawyer... day to day knowledge of law suffices to throw this out. :/
mcv 13y ago
Don't make threats if you don't intend to follow up on them. Also, from his lawyer: "They didn't find pentagrams and candles. He wasn't listening to Judas Priest." WTF does that have to do with anything? Do only Judas Priest fans shoot up kindergartens? Is there something wrong with liking pentagrams and candles? I think that lawyer is the real creep here, and that kind of defense deserves to be ineffective. In any case, if you threaten to shoot up a kindergarten, of course the police is going to look into you. Imagine the outrage if they got a tip like that, ignored it, and then the guy shot up a kindergarten? They have no option but to detain him, and the lack of candles in his home is utterly irrelevant to that. And of course they then need to gather complete evidence, which includes the facebook conversation, details of his past, his mental health, etc. And maybe they messed up there. They clearly messed up some other stuff, in particular the jail where someone can get sexually molested, and the fact that they conned him out of a lawyer. The article does list a number of worrying aspects of US law enforcement injustice that seems way too common lately. But that doesn't change the fact that if you make a death threat, you should expect to get arrested.
- pessimizer 13y ago
  The point is that this is a stupid moral panic, which is why he was referencing past stupid moral panics. He's not trying to imply that Judas Priest is staging a comeback.
- Jehar 13y ago
  Look into != jail for several months. There are (supposedly) fairly well-defined use cases for probable cause and sufficient evidence to prosecute, and it seems these were all trampled over in this case. In regards to the Judas Priest comments, I think that may have been some unintentional hyperbole/satire, pointing at the widely disproved profiling of school shooters. The Harris/Klebold case had a lot of cultural baggage of that type, most of which was fabricated by journalists. Citing them as fans of Marilyn Manson is one example; they possessed no Manson albums or memorabilia.
  - mcv 13y ago
    > Look into != jail for several months. Oh, absolutely. The utter travesty and corruption after the arrest is atrocious. And that sort of stuff seems to happen way too often in the US. I'm not defending that at all. The only thing I'm saying is that treating threats as a joke is stupid and dangerous, and the police should investigate threats, and not assume they're merely a joke without investigating. Apparently that makes me a minority on HN, and most people here seem to think joke threats are okay. I don't.
wavesounds 13y ago
So let me get this straight. You can anonymously send police a picture of text next to someone's name and have that person arrested?!
- angrybits 13y ago
  yes. look up the term "swatting" if you want to see how far it can go.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
wisienkas 13y ago
I Think it is frightening how illogical and incompetent USA work for justice, instead they ruin lives of innocent people, even robbing them of the freedom to speak. They just turned down their own culture once again, like all the censure they apparently love.
izzydata 13y ago
Good old fashion thought crimes.
janj 13y ago
This country has its fair share of over zealous prosecutors and out of control cops. We need a way to track these events to the individual to make it easier to identify patterns. When deputy Erik Gelhaus shot and killed an innocent 13 year old boy here in Santa Rosa I tried to find out if he had a history of violent interactions with the public. That's when I realized no one seemed to be tracking these events. There should be a service where I can look up the prosecutors in this case and see if they have a history of this type of behavior. I should be able to look up any cop and find their history of violent interactions with the public if there is one. How can we trust these people with power if we can't hold them accountable?
- sixothree 13y ago
  Agreed. And that is where I believe our country has gone so wrong. There are few checks and balances against a run amok justice system. There is little transparency to people who destroy lives as a part of their daily job.
Fizzadar 13y ago
Although he's an idiot for posting such comments, the way the US police and district attorney's have behaved is unbelievable. This guy is clearly innocent but they seem hellbent on getting a prosecution. I see cases such as this much more often on HN recently and it feels as if the entire US justice system is totally fucked up and completely missing the real targets: the criminals.
sliverstorm 13y ago
When officers searched Carter's home, Flanary says, they did not find the hallmarks of a lunatic. "They found no guns in his house," Huh. Guns = hallmark of a lunatic?
- jff 13y ago
  That was my response too, but at least you'd assume a real lunatic who planned to shoot up a school would, you know, have a gun. That's why I don't joke about shooting people.
- thelibrarian 13y ago
  I think they meant that they neither found evidence that he was a lunatic, nor any guns (i.e. not only did he not have the mental state for carrying out a shooting, he did not even have the means). I think either in his speech or during editing the conjunction was accidentally dropped. At least, that was my reading of it.
auggierose 13y ago
Let's just say the US is a really fucked up place.
31reasons 13y ago
Moral of the story: Not using Facebook is worth at least 10 years of your life and $500k.
- therobot24 13y ago
  only if you plan on making sarcastic death threats
jcutrell 13y ago
A few years ago, I spent a night in in Fulton County jail. The purpose, in my opinion, was fairly ridiculous. I'll tell a reasonably brief version of the story. I moved to Atlanta to attend Georgia Tech for my masters. One late night, I was driving and took a right on a red light that had a "no right on red sign" accidentally. Don't forget to check for no right on red signs. No traffic was around and luckily no one was endangered, but I did receive a ticket (clearly the Atl police had set up a trap of sorts). Should have paid attention, but no big deal. So the court date is approaching, and so is my first day of classes. In the rush of getting ready for the start of the semester, I forgot my court date. Don't forget your court date. The next day, in a panic, I call the courthouse to pay my ticket and any applicable late fees. I assumed that a late fee would cover the infraction and we'd all be on our way. I paid the ticket. I paid the late fee. I forgot about the incident altogether. Fast forward a few months, I was driving on campus on my way to class, early enough to get a coffee (yes!). I get pulled over for not having my seatbelt on. Don't forget your seatbelt. The officer took a few minutes and came back to ask me if I had anyone who could pick up my car. Of course I'm thinking, "Do I have a flat tire or something?", and he lets me know he's going to have to arrest me and take me to jail. So I was put in handcuffs, on campus, and taken to Fulton County Jail, where I was fully booked into a holding cell. I could not call anyone to come post bail, because your "one call" was only allowed to be a local call, and you had to know the number by heart. I couldn't post the bail myself via card, of course. So, I spent 36 hours there. My parents even paid my bail, but somehow the bail didn't take effect (even though others arrested after me got out on bail). Strangest 36 hours of my life, by far. All of my clothes and belongings were taken, as is protocol. Not a single guard seemed to have any sense of regard for me (or any other person being held), uniformly ignoring simple requests like "can I have some water?" and "what time is it?". I was in a common holding room with about 10 others for most of the first day, until they did our physicals and booked us all into overnight cells. I was woken up to a yelling guard at 3AM to eat "breakfast." Everyone who had been arrested the day before was chained together (as in, chains around my waist) and taken to a prison court to see a judge via a camera mounted on a TV. The judge essentially looked at my case and released me, and a few hours later I was finally let out. Turns out, when you forget a court date, your license gets suspended. For me, that meant I had to have someone take me to Alabama to have it unsuspended. tl;dr; The crazy part of the justice system is, once the ball gets rolling and protocol is instantiated, your lost time is chalked up to collateral damage and "due process." Your sense of safety, clarity, and rights are removed, even in minuscule clerical cases like mine. I can't even begin to imagine the ridiculous feeling of being in jail and sexually assaulted for months, much less years, over something slightly more egregious than a suspended license. P.S. My arrest was completely expunged from my record, but you can still find my mugshot online. My dad laughs at it every time he sees it.
JeffL 13y ago
They tricked him into admitting that he wrote the FB post by telling him that they'd let him go if he just admitted it. Another example of "Don't talk to cops!"
johnny635 13y ago
Time to ban Facebook.
Ryel 13y ago
I'm actually kind of surprised by the reaction here on HN. I thought most of you would come to conclusion that this kid did have serious problems and did make a big mistake. He needed a slap on the wrist (that's an idiom, don't report me to the police) and a lot of community service.
vonnik 13y ago
classic overprosecution a la aaron schwartz. when the wheels of justice start to grind, someone inevitably gets crushed. i think hugo said that...
basicallydan 13y ago
I'm almost afraid to have a Facebook account if they are taken this seriously by authorities. If someone got a hold of my account and posted horrible things, I'd be devastated.
richardlblair 13y ago
tl;dr Don't say really fucked up shit on the internet...
Pxtl 13y ago
Penny Arcade comic on the subject http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2013/07/08 http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2013/07/08
- benched 13y ago
  This may seem like exaggeration, but you exist in a shared open space with 7 billion talking wild animals. You really can get anything, for anything.
hisabness 13y ago
what if one of his buddies had hijacked his account as a joke?
tool 13y ago
And people still seriously think that taking anonymity away from the internet is a good thing. I don't know what sickens me more, the american legal system or modern internet filled with people that have absolutely no understand of privacy because of their sheltered lives.
iterative 13y ago
The prosecutor(s) should be fired and disbarred.
sdegutis 13y ago
I think I get it. The city was worried about a real possibility of shooting. So they searched his house and found nothing. They realized he wasn't a real threat. Just a jerk. But they also wanted to send a message, loud and clear, to society: if you make jokes like this, you will suffer the consequences. So they left him in jail. They set an illegally high bond. They manipulated this gullible boy into giving them a reason to move him to a worse jail, where they knew he would be raped. When it happened, they feigned surprise. Sure, there were good intentions. They wanted to discourage the kind of joking that puts people into a state of panic. But they went about it extremely unethically, immorally, and most likely illegally. I've gone to jail, I've been through the US court system, they're very manipulative and this is how they work. It's not right.
pawelkomarnicki 13y ago
He acted like moron and got rightfully punished, this should happen to all trolls over the Internet :)
cgdangelo 13y ago
>Prosecutors say they don't have the entire thread — instead, they have three comments on a cell-phone screenshot. There's so many things that make this situation _ridiculous_, but this takes the cake. I would have thought that in a case dealing with a few sentences, the full context of those sentences would be important. I've been aware of this story for a while now and it always boggled my mind. But after reading this, there's some very troubling things going on that I didn't even know about. Hope he can get out from under all this, recover, and move on with his life.

353 points by jborden13 13y ago

> When a person writing under the profile name "Hannah Love" responded with "i hope you [burn] in hell you fucking prick," Actually the comment was "i hope you fucking bring in hell you fucking prick". That is a pretty significant difference.

darklajid 13y ago
English as a second language. The former makes sense, i.e. I can parse that. The latter causes me to stutter and look confused when I read that. Explain? Difference and meaning of the latter version? I ignore the whole 'went to jail for a random FB comment' crap. That's just sad but not surprising any more.
- pgsandstrom 13y ago
  "i hope you fucking bring in hell" is meant as "I hope you give them hell".
  - vacri 13y ago
    "I hope you give them hell you fucking prick"? I don't think so. It's just a garden-variety wrong-word typo. I often make them, as do plenty of others.
  - rosser 13y ago
    You have no definitive proof of that, and I think your assertion is as laughably specious as the prosecution's in this case.
    - adventured 13y ago
      And I think that's exactly the point being made.
- legohead 13y ago
  "bring in hell" could mean they are supporting him in his endeavor, ie. give(bring) them hell! but the "fucking prick" part kind of negates that idea.
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  Native US English. "I hope you burn in hell" is normal. The comment as written, "I hope you bring in hell you fucking prick", is nonsense. If someone asked me what it meant, I'd be confused, but I wouldn't assume that "bring" was a typo for "burn".
  - DanBC 13y ago
    I'd assume it was an autocorrect error.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
ars 13y ago
I'm reasonably sure that bring is a typo for burn. I mean yes, the way it was written is a valid sentence, but it's an odd one. Assuming a typo makes much more sense, especially with the concluding insult.

hmsimha 13y ago

While they're at it why not arrest every musician, poet, and writer who ever penned dark or violent writing.

Cthulhu_ 13y ago
There's a notable difference between writing a book and publishing an announcement that you're going to go on a killing spree. The former is relatively benign, the latter has far too often been done right before a killing spree. The former is done over time, in relative peace; the latter is done in the spur of the moment. It's like writing the Anarchist's Cookbook about how to make a bomb, and writing a tweet about how you're going to plant a bomb in Boston in a couple minutes. The latter is a direct threat and requires immediate action. Most of the time, it's too late even for that. Personally, this dude should've known better and restrain his impulsive internet lulz behavior.
- vdaniuk 13y ago
  >the latter has far too often been done right before a killing spree. Basic Bayesian approach to probability tells us that this metric of predicting violent events is counter-productive due to a great number of false positives.
- hmsimha 13y ago
  This man's facebook post alone, and especially absent of any kind of access to a gun, are no grounds to assume any actual intent to cause physical harm. Far from it, I would say artists who have a history of violent confrontation, write/sing/rap about stabbing, shooting, or otherwise assaulting other people, and actually are in possession of weapons they could use to do so, could be assumed by any reasonable person to be more guilty of actually having an intent, or at least an overzealous willingness, to cause harm to others.
- darkarmani 13y ago
  > Personally, this dude should've known better and restrain his impulsive internet lulz behavior. Obviously, you've never played any online games.

billyjobob 13y ago

Wow, I didn't realise US police were that bad. After reading this I don't think I could ever feel safe enough to visit the US. Sounds like you'd have a better chance of getting justice in an African dictatorship where at least the dont-rape-me bribe would be affordable. Tourists really should be warned about this, because it's not the image the US tourist boards present to us at all.

zacinbusiness 13y ago
Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, North and South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia - fear these places.
- ItendToDisagree 13y ago
  Any state south of the Mason-Dixon line is portrayed as a cartoonish land of religious fanatics, racism, and overreaction. In truth it is not exactly so, but I personally wouldn't want to live in any of those places. I probably wouldn't be happy living in the mid-west either though. It generally holds true that these sorts of things can happen in any state now. If you 'threaten' to shoot up a school (no matter how jokingly) you're likely to get reamed for it. Context no longer matters... There is a zero tolerance policy on certain words and ideas now it appears.
  - zacinbusiness 13y ago
    I've lived in the south my whole life. It's a hell hole of backwards racism, fear. I stay here for my family and my wife's job. But it's hard.
  - nervousvarun 13y ago
    Lived in the south my entire life (currently in Nola). There's definitely an I don't know...afterglow effect? with this stereotype at play in the south today. It certainly used to be highly isolated culture with it's own weird problems ("fanatics, racism, and overreaction"). These days though thanks to television, the internet, decades of immigration etc. it's pretty much the rest of the US...with better weather.

StavrosK 13y ago

Is he charged with anything? I only saw a reference to a "terrorist threat", what kind of fucked up country is one that gets you ten years in jail for joking about committing a crime? Don't you actually have to commit the crime to go to prison, usually?

kevingadd 13y ago
Outside the internet, death threats are serious business and usually a crime, regardless of whether you have the actual intent or ability to kill someone. Likewise there's that tired old example of yelling fire in a crowded theater (though i don't think that applies here)
- spacemanmatt 13y ago
  On or off the internet, an alleged death threat is subject to considerations of actual intent. Following up a comment with "lol/jk" as he ACTUALLY DID pretty much deflates all the billowy claims of his death threat. But that is conveniently omitted in popular reporting.
- dTal 13y ago
  Wasn't the "crowded theater" analogy originally conceived to support the passage of the Espionage Act in America? It might be tired and old now, but was never even legit to begin with.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  Likewise there's that tired old example of yelling fire in a crowded theater What most people misunderstand about that is that it is okay to yell fire in a crowded theater, provided that a fire actually exists. Doesn't really apply here, but I've met plenty of people who interpret it literally as "Don't yell fire under any circumstances at all."
zacinbusiness 13y ago
Not at all. Thousands of innocent people at sitting in our jails as we speak. Most of them will never be free. But that's beside the point. He's not in prison, he's in jail, and there's a big difference. Depending on the circumstances, you could sit in jail your whole life while you await some technical process to complete. You don't even have to be charged with anything.

cinskiy 13y ago

Well nobody today thinks twice about posting something on the internet, especially youth, and while they should, it's still OK, because it's the way social messaging and posting works, and everybody else should be more or less OK with that too. 10 years for trolling is way over the top, just fine him already and let him go.

spacemanmatt 13y ago
Fine him for what? He has been convicted of nothing.
andrelaszlo 13y ago
Just rape him already and let him go.
- adwf 13y ago
  Quite. I'm always shocked that people make jokes about this in American TV shows and movies. As if raping men on top of their prison sentence is somehow "justice" that they deserve. It's horrific.
girvo 13y ago
He's already been raped in prison. The case should be thrown out, and he should be awarded compensation. No fines.
- yungether 13y ago
  http://youtu.be/Ypcs4c7ihSo?t=1m27s http://youtu.be/Ypcs4c7ihSo?t=1m27s

ryanatkn 13y ago

Not sure why this article doesn't include a seemingly important detail, but it was widely reported that Justin ended his comments with "LOL" and "JK". Mens rea indeed.

dirktheman 13y ago

I think anyone agrees that this whole situation has been blown out of proportion on a massive scale. But threatening to shoot up a school, in the light of recent events... really? What if he actually DID shoot up a school, and afterwards people discovered that authorities WERE warned? People need to realize that what you post on the internet can be interpreted different than what you actually meant. Besides, threatening with an act of terrorism is never funny, and always a bad idea. My El Al (Israeli airline) flight was delayed once because some prankster thought it was funny to say 'I have a bomb' to the flight attendant while boarding. He was thrown in jail and had to pay for delaying the flight. In this case, the punishment doesn't fit the crime. I do wish people would think twice before making threats as a joke, though.

jpttsn 13y ago
> Besides, threatening with an act of terrorism is never funny, and always a bad idea. That's a little narrow-minded. I can easily imagine scenarios where it's funny and/or a fairly good idea.
- dirktheman 13y ago
  I stand corrected. Achmed the dead terrorist was hilarious!
  - ItendToDisagree 13y ago
    Anything can be funny. If you want a perfect example (regarding rape, something widely held to be not funny) look up the George Carlin rape bit. It doesn't matter what the subject is. Anything can be funny.
    - dirktheman 13y ago
      That made me laugh, proving your right. As with all jokes, timing is key, though!
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]

MojoJolo 13y ago

This is disturbing. They arrest the guy and sentenced to ten years in jail with just a screenshot of a Facebook comment as a starting evidence. It's kinda puzzling to me why didn't they manage to check the whole thread? I think it's simple enough and contacting Facebook for it is not needed. What's the topic of the thread? We don't know. Edit: Let's also not disregard the fact that the screenshot can be all made up. They can't find the thread. Maybe it was edited, or created through Photoshop. I think it's fairly easy.

corresation 13y ago
They arrest the guy and sentenced to ten years in jail with just a screenshot of a Facebook comment as a starting evidence. I don't believe he has been sentenced to anything. He was given an offer of 10 years probation, which his lawyer bizarrely spouts off against as if deals are not the common actions in the justice system. In any case, he confessed to what was stated, and despite the spin now that it was a false confession, in earlier versions of reports about this he freely admitted that he said what he said...but that he purportedly followed it up later by an lol that made it all okay. It is actually interesting seeing how people sway in opinion about things. In the whole Flappy Bird fiasco, many were calling for the heads of those who "threatened the life" of the author, even though the threats were almost universally clearly absurd or satirical. Yet in this case it is an outrage that the police followed up on threats against children (shortly after Sandy Hook), and then when they discovered a confluence of concerning behaviors (suicide threats, restraining orders, bizarre behavior) they pursued actual charges. Should people be raped in jail? Of course they shouldn't. No criminal should. Though it's interesting that many on here believe that he is not like those other criminals, when the jails are stuffed with non-violent offenders who likewise shouldn't face sexual assaults. Should people face absurd sentences about thought crimes? Of course not. But what you say matters. Words have consequences. This whole fallback on some rote "Freedom of Speech!" thing is devolving from a civilized behavior. EDIT: I see that we're not looking for a rational, mature discussions. More of a rah rah rah mass outrage.
- chc 13y ago
  Oh, don't be such a martyr. Sometimes the fault is your own. In this case, your description of the course of events displays a good understanding of what happened, and yet you present it in a way that is quite deceptive. If you want a better response, try being more even-handed. > In any case, he confessed to what was stated, and despite the spin now that it was a false confession, in earlier versions of reports about this he freely admitted that he said what he said...but that he purportedly followed it up later by an lol that made it all okay. This reminds me of a courtroom scene in My Cousin Vinny. Upon being told that he was being charged for the murder of the sheriff, one of the main characters exclaims in disbelief, "What?! I shot the sheriff?!" And then in trial, the prosecutor asks him, "Did you not tell police, 'I shot the sheriff'?" That movie was a comedy, but you're seriously trying to make this argument. You're acting like a silly parody of a prosecutor. Agreeing upon the words used does not mean this guy "confessed." And yes, the fact that it wasn't actually a threat does make it OK. Why wouldn't it? What interest does the law have in punishing people who aren't actually issuing threats? Should Alan Rickman be afraid of punishment for all the villainous lines he's delivered on camera?

nopassrecover 13y ago

> Until that point, his only brush with the law was a temporary restraining order two years earlier. > "He started threatening me, saying that he would kill me. ... I told the school officers, [and] they started watching him really closely. He would say that he would shoot up the school." So I'll start by playing Devil's Advocate very briefly. It's interesting how facts can be shaped with different language ("his only brush with the law"): it appears the restraining order from two years prior related to similar threats to those alleged in the Facebook comments (although in a remarkably different context). Now that notwithstanding, it seems there are many glaring issues, both ethical and legal, with the way this has been handled. Based on a screenshot of a Facebook comment without context or verification from Facebook an 18 year-old was detained for months without trial, including his 19th birthday, and offered a plea bargain of 8 years jail (!). An unaffordable bail of $500k was set, and if not for media attention, pro bono counsel, and a generous anonymous donor he would still be detained. During his detention he was repeatedly sexually assaulted, withheld legal counsel, and coerced to confess with false promises of freedom. After media focus an offer of 10 years (!) probation was put forward. On a technical note, the original warrant included false testimony (matching of the Facebook profile picture to a driver's licence when the accused did not have a licence) and the indictment misquoted the original Facebook comment. How does anyone think this is reasonable?

jessedhillon 13y ago
Important to point out, re the restraining order, that according to the article he wasn't given the opportunity to respond to the charges made against him. Restraining orders aren't convictions, I am surprised that it seems they can be used as evidence given that they apparently do not imply any finding of fact.
- spacemanmatt 13y ago
  In a witch hunt, a lack of evidence implies a cover-up. A piece of non-evidence becomes a smoking gun. We've lost our heads.
Fasebook 13y ago
Because I'm scared.

spacemanmatt 13y ago

WIDELY MISREPORTED. Austin resident here. There is very little right about this case. He was joking, and his original post included indications of this. Prosecutors intentionally misrepresented and truncated his comments to mislead the Grand Jury. The arrest warrant issued claimed they found him by driver's license records but he has never had a Texas driver's license. They failed to protect him, an 18 year old kid, in jail. He has been sexually assaulted. The state maintains their case against him at this point only to blunt his eventual lawsuit against them.

tbastos 13y ago
I hope the kid wins a shitload of money in a lawsuit against the state... and the cops get punished. Now what's the chance of this happening?
- rmc 13y ago
  I don't get it, I thought the USA was a massive litigation centre and you could sue people for millions left right and centre? Are you saying that you can't sue people like that?
  - beachstartup 13y ago
    i'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but suing people takes time and money, something most people don't have a lot of.
    - dm2 13y ago
      Many lawyers will work for a contingency fee if they feel you have a strong case.
  - mjklin 13y ago
    I believe tbastos believes that there is little chance the police will be punished. The kid absolutely will bring, and win, a lawsuit if the parent comment is true.
  - 13y ago

sheetjs 13y ago

Out of curiosity: if someone hacked this kid's account and posted those comments, and if the legal system is considering the Facebook comments to be his words, what recourse does he have? How does he demonstrate that the speech wasn't his?

Tohhou 13y ago
What about someone who creates an account, picks a name of a victim, uploads a picture, and then sends threats to others on their victim's behalf.
DanBC 13y ago
I'm guessing this is just one more eeason that you don't say anything until you have a lawyer.
- pbhjpbhj 13y ago
  What do you do when you're in custody and the police deny you access to your lawyer as appears to be the case here. Or moves you and provides a puppet lawyer, as also appears to be the case here. Or simply incarcerate you without charge for an extended period as also seems to be the case here. Do you keep quite when those incarcerating you [by action or inaction] set you up to be raped. At what point do you give in and say anything to try and make it stop? If USA has an actual justice system that cares for due process I can't see how anyone involved in these actions can retain a position of any authority within that system.
  - iopq 13y ago
    You still don't admit any fault or guilt! It never helps. They only have you admit things to put you in prison. There is no other reason. "Proving" you're innocent to the cop is not admitted in court anyway. Admitting you're guilty to the cop is.
- noptic 13y ago
  Did your lawyer approve this comment?

DanBC 13y ago

For the people who think that this kind of direct threat needs a punishment: what would be suitable?

spacemanmatt 13y ago
His constitutional right to a speedy trial would have been suitable, instead he was sexually assaulted before he got bailed out by an anonymous donor. Texas owes this poor guy.
spacemanmatt 13y ago
First of all, 'people' do not get to decide whether this is a direct threat that needs punishment. Judges of laws make that call. We have rules for a reason. The police broke them and this accused kid is suffering for it. There is no justification for putting him in jail just because someone thought they might feel threatened. There were multiple breakdowns in the legal system that should have protected him from illegal arrest and prosecution but comments like this make it seem ok to turn a blind eye. He's never been convicted of anything. Why the rush to punish?
- DanBC 13y ago
  I'm ignoring all the pre-conviction stuff. It's boring because it is blindingly obvious that people should have access to a humane legal system. The more interesting discussion, to me, is "assume 'Bob' makes a clear and direct threat of violence against a school, and is found guilty in a fair trial. Should 'Bob' receive punishment, and if so what?"
dirktheman 13y ago
A mandatory field trip to Sandy Hook and a sit-down with one of the parents would be nice.
zimpenfish 13y ago
I'd rate "being a dumbass insensitive asshat" as "about 20 hours of community service".

blueskin_ 13y ago

Welcome to the police state.

D9u 13y ago

The Comal County District Attorney's Office did not intend for Carter to suffer what happened next, Flanary says, but it was reasonably foreseeable: He was sexually assaulted. The fact that prisoners are commonly subject to sexual assault, and that this consequence is trotted out as an acceptable deterrent to crime, illustrates just how uncivilized the US prison-industrial-complex is in this, the year 2014. Failure to protect vulnerable and, or, weaker inmates from other inmates shows negligence on the part of the government. This is completely unacceptable as it constitutes cruel & unusual punishment, and is yet another blatant disregard for the rights of We the People. Then there's the fact that the context of the offensive speech was excluded from evidence. Disgusting!

Xdes 13y ago
Prison in the US isn't about rehabilitation it's about punishment. No one goes to prison thinking they're going to come out as a better person with a new outlook on life. They're going to come out war-torn and barely above functional with little to no prospects.
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  This is exactly why the stories of people that do come out a better person (got a degree, found religion, etc) make the "news". No body talks much about the other 99% that just come out more pissed at the world than before they went in.
- markus2012 13y ago
  Little to no prospects: right, because punishment doesn't stop when you leave prison. Punishment continues until the day you die: you can't get a good job because virtually no one will hire an ex-con.
  - WalterBright 13y ago
    And that's not just because employers are bad people - it's the propensity of people to sue and win against the employers if an employee commits a crime. The employer is even further liable if he knew the employee was an ex-con.

chris-martin 13y ago

This headline is sickening. Comal County criminal prosecutors ruined this man's life.

therobot24 13y ago
Facebook in the headline gets readers, usually i would agree that using the name to spread the words is heinous, but the crimes against this kid are worse

bromagosa 13y ago

«Flanary believes it's paramount that if someone is criminally charged on the basis of his words, a jury needs to see all the words.» Wait, but shouldn't the case be that noone can be charged on the basis of his words?

chilldream 13y ago
Actual threats, stalking, and intimidation do exist. The problem here isn't that threats don't happen, it's that anyone with half a brain can see that this conversation wasn't a serious threat.

stefantalpalaru 13y ago

All this because of an image that looks like a screenshot? Wait 'till 4chan gets a wind of this...

girvo 13y ago

Every single person who is complicit in the mental and physical (he was raped in prison, people -- and the fact that some believe that prison rape is part of the punishment need their effing head checked) trauma should be fired. Disgusting. The fact that they don't even have the context of what was said, and yet they're still trying to hit him with a felony is beyond ludicrous. I'm honestly awestruck that a prosecutor could think that this is a trophy they want to earn. Funnily enough, situations like this (and the various ethical issues) are the reason I decided to leave my law degree. I can't reconcile my own morals and ethics with the reality of the justice system.

dTal 13y ago
And yet, if no one with ethics had the stomach for law, how could we expect an ethical justice system? It's same problem as with politics.

nebulous1 13y ago

> Carter's comments were part of a duel between dorks, and may have had something to do with a game with strong dork appeal called League of Legends. I actually laughed out loud at this. Is the Dallas Observer a rag or does the word 'dork' seem less ridiculous to people from Texas or the US?

MarkTee 13y ago
I had the same reaction (I'm from Canada).
ChrisClark 13y ago
It might be? One of the quotes has a lawyer saying 'bonkers'. I just assumed the language used there is a bit different.

w_t_payne 13y ago

The law has to be applied uniformly. If we prosecute one individual for a particular act, we have to prosecute all individuals who perform such acts. We clearly have, as a society, the means to make this happen, so then, why don't we? It seems that we are abandoning the principles that guide the rule of law here.

yaccz 13y ago

Internet adage reflecting the idea that without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law

jheriko 13y ago

is there any evidence in this case which should be admissable in a court of law? i might eb exaggerating - i mean i think they got the right guy, but i see nothing here which is a good enough quality of 'evidence' for legal purposes, and i am not even a lawyer... day to day knowledge of law suffices to throw this out. :/

mcv 13y ago

Don't make threats if you don't intend to follow up on them. Also, from his lawyer: "They didn't find pentagrams and candles. He wasn't listening to Judas Priest." WTF does that have to do with anything? Do only Judas Priest fans shoot up kindergartens? Is there something wrong with liking pentagrams and candles? I think that lawyer is the real creep here, and that kind of defense deserves to be ineffective. In any case, if you threaten to shoot up a kindergarten, of course the police is going to look into you. Imagine the outrage if they got a tip like that, ignored it, and then the guy shot up a kindergarten? They have no option but to detain him, and the lack of candles in his home is utterly irrelevant to that. And of course they then need to gather complete evidence, which includes the facebook conversation, details of his past, his mental health, etc. And maybe they messed up there. They clearly messed up some other stuff, in particular the jail where someone can get sexually molested, and the fact that they conned him out of a lawyer. The article does list a number of worrying aspects of US law enforcement injustice that seems way too common lately. But that doesn't change the fact that if you make a death threat, you should expect to get arrested.

pessimizer 13y ago
The point is that this is a stupid moral panic, which is why he was referencing past stupid moral panics. He's not trying to imply that Judas Priest is staging a comeback.
Jehar 13y ago
Look into != jail for several months. There are (supposedly) fairly well-defined use cases for probable cause and sufficient evidence to prosecute, and it seems these were all trampled over in this case. In regards to the Judas Priest comments, I think that may have been some unintentional hyperbole/satire, pointing at the widely disproved profiling of school shooters. The Harris/Klebold case had a lot of cultural baggage of that type, most of which was fabricated by journalists. Citing them as fans of Marilyn Manson is one example; they possessed no Manson albums or memorabilia.
- mcv 13y ago
  > Look into != jail for several months. Oh, absolutely. The utter travesty and corruption after the arrest is atrocious. And that sort of stuff seems to happen way too often in the US. I'm not defending that at all. The only thing I'm saying is that treating threats as a joke is stupid and dangerous, and the police should investigate threats, and not assume they're merely a joke without investigating. Apparently that makes me a minority on HN, and most people here seem to think joke threats are okay. I don't.

wavesounds 13y ago

So let me get this straight. You can anonymously send police a picture of text next to someone's name and have that person arrested?!

angrybits 13y ago
yes. look up the term "swatting" if you want to see how far it can go.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

wisienkas 13y ago

I Think it is frightening how illogical and incompetent USA work for justice, instead they ruin lives of innocent people, even robbing them of the freedom to speak. They just turned down their own culture once again, like all the censure they apparently love.

izzydata 13y ago

Good old fashion thought crimes.

janj 13y ago

This country has its fair share of over zealous prosecutors and out of control cops. We need a way to track these events to the individual to make it easier to identify patterns. When deputy Erik Gelhaus shot and killed an innocent 13 year old boy here in Santa Rosa I tried to find out if he had a history of violent interactions with the public. That's when I realized no one seemed to be tracking these events. There should be a service where I can look up the prosecutors in this case and see if they have a history of this type of behavior. I should be able to look up any cop and find their history of violent interactions with the public if there is one. How can we trust these people with power if we can't hold them accountable?

sixothree 13y ago
Agreed. And that is where I believe our country has gone so wrong. There are few checks and balances against a run amok justice system. There is little transparency to people who destroy lives as a part of their daily job.

Fizzadar 13y ago

Although he's an idiot for posting such comments, the way the US police and district attorney's have behaved is unbelievable. This guy is clearly innocent but they seem hellbent on getting a prosecution. I see cases such as this much more often on HN recently and it feels as if the entire US justice system is totally fucked up and completely missing the real targets: the criminals.

sliverstorm 13y ago

When officers searched Carter's home, Flanary says, they did not find the hallmarks of a lunatic. "They found no guns in his house," Huh. Guns = hallmark of a lunatic?

jff 13y ago
That was my response too, but at least you'd assume a real lunatic who planned to shoot up a school would, you know, have a gun. That's why I don't joke about shooting people.
thelibrarian 13y ago
I think they meant that they neither found evidence that he was a lunatic, nor any guns (i.e. not only did he not have the mental state for carrying out a shooting, he did not even have the means). I think either in his speech or during editing the conjunction was accidentally dropped. At least, that was my reading of it.

auggierose 13y ago

Let's just say the US is a really fucked up place.

31reasons 13y ago

Moral of the story: Not using Facebook is worth at least 10 years of your life and $500k.

therobot24 13y ago
only if you plan on making sarcastic death threats

jcutrell 13y ago

A few years ago, I spent a night in in Fulton County jail. The purpose, in my opinion, was fairly ridiculous. I'll tell a reasonably brief version of the story. I moved to Atlanta to attend Georgia Tech for my masters. One late night, I was driving and took a right on a red light that had a "no right on red sign" accidentally. Don't forget to check for no right on red signs. No traffic was around and luckily no one was endangered, but I did receive a ticket (clearly the Atl police had set up a trap of sorts). Should have paid attention, but no big deal. So the court date is approaching, and so is my first day of classes. In the rush of getting ready for the start of the semester, I forgot my court date. Don't forget your court date. The next day, in a panic, I call the courthouse to pay my ticket and any applicable late fees. I assumed that a late fee would cover the infraction and we'd all be on our way. I paid the ticket. I paid the late fee. I forgot about the incident altogether. Fast forward a few months, I was driving on campus on my way to class, early enough to get a coffee (yes!). I get pulled over for not having my seatbelt on. Don't forget your seatbelt. The officer took a few minutes and came back to ask me if I had anyone who could pick up my car. Of course I'm thinking, "Do I have a flat tire or something?", and he lets me know he's going to have to arrest me and take me to jail. So I was put in handcuffs, on campus, and taken to Fulton County Jail, where I was fully booked into a holding cell. I could not call anyone to come post bail, because your "one call" was only allowed to be a local call, and you had to know the number by heart. I couldn't post the bail myself via card, of course. So, I spent 36 hours there. My parents even paid my bail, but somehow the bail didn't take effect (even though others arrested after me got out on bail). Strangest 36 hours of my life, by far. All of my clothes and belongings were taken, as is protocol. Not a single guard seemed to have any sense of regard for me (or any other person being held), uniformly ignoring simple requests like "can I have some water?" and "what time is it?". I was in a common holding room with about 10 others for most of the first day, until they did our physicals and booked us all into overnight cells. I was woken up to a yelling guard at 3AM to eat "breakfast." Everyone who had been arrested the day before was chained together (as in, chains around my waist) and taken to a prison court to see a judge via a camera mounted on a TV. The judge essentially looked at my case and released me, and a few hours later I was finally let out. Turns out, when you forget a court date, your license gets suspended. For me, that meant I had to have someone take me to Alabama to have it unsuspended. tl;dr; The crazy part of the justice system is, once the ball gets rolling and protocol is instantiated, your lost time is chalked up to collateral damage and "due process." Your sense of safety, clarity, and rights are removed, even in minuscule clerical cases like mine. I can't even begin to imagine the ridiculous feeling of being in jail and sexually assaulted for months, much less years, over something slightly more egregious than a suspended license. P.S. My arrest was completely expunged from my record, but you can still find my mugshot online. My dad laughs at it every time he sees it.

JeffL 13y ago

They tricked him into admitting that he wrote the FB post by telling him that they'd let him go if he just admitted it. Another example of "Don't talk to cops!"

johnny635 13y ago

Time to ban Facebook.

Ryel 13y ago

I'm actually kind of surprised by the reaction here on HN. I thought most of you would come to conclusion that this kid did have serious problems and did make a big mistake. He needed a slap on the wrist (that's an idiom, don't report me to the police) and a lot of community service.

vonnik 13y ago

classic overprosecution a la aaron schwartz. when the wheels of justice start to grind, someone inevitably gets crushed. i think hugo said that...

basicallydan 13y ago

I'm almost afraid to have a Facebook account if they are taken this seriously by authorities. If someone got a hold of my account and posted horrible things, I'd be devastated.

richardlblair 13y ago

tl;dr Don't say really fucked up shit on the internet...

Pxtl 13y ago

Penny Arcade comic on the subject http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2013/07/08 http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2013/07/08

benched 13y ago
This may seem like exaggeration, but you exist in a shared open space with 7 billion talking wild animals. You really can get anything, for anything.

hisabness 13y ago

what if one of his buddies had hijacked his account as a joke?

tool 13y ago

And people still seriously think that taking anonymity away from the internet is a good thing. I don't know what sickens me more, the american legal system or modern internet filled with people that have absolutely no understand of privacy because of their sheltered lives.

iterative 13y ago

The prosecutor(s) should be fired and disbarred.

sdegutis 13y ago

I think I get it. The city was worried about a real possibility of shooting. So they searched his house and found nothing. They realized he wasn't a real threat. Just a jerk. But they also wanted to send a message, loud and clear, to society: if you make jokes like this, you will suffer the consequences. So they left him in jail. They set an illegally high bond. They manipulated this gullible boy into giving them a reason to move him to a worse jail, where they knew he would be raped. When it happened, they feigned surprise. Sure, there were good intentions. They wanted to discourage the kind of joking that puts people into a state of panic. But they went about it extremely unethically, immorally, and most likely illegally. I've gone to jail, I've been through the US court system, they're very manipulative and this is how they work. It's not right.

pawelkomarnicki 13y ago

He acted like moron and got rightfully punished, this should happen to all trolls over the Internet :)

cgdangelo 13y ago

>Prosecutors say they don't have the entire thread — instead, they have three comments on a cell-phone screenshot. There's so many things that make this situation _ridiculous_, but this takes the cake. I would have thought that in a case dealing with a few sentences, the full context of those sentences would be important. I've been aware of this story for a while now and it always boggled my mind. But after reading this, there's some very troubling things going on that I didn't even know about. Hope he can get out from under all this, recover, and move on with his life.