14 ms·
Teen Arrested for 30+ Swattings, Bomb Threats
- rpledge 12y agoIt's interesting to see him named in the article - since he is under 18 in Canada he will be protected by the young offenders act and cannot be identified in the media. I suppose that is only applicable for Canadian media outlets.
- chris_wot 12y agoI really have very little sympathy for him. Plenty of people have issues at home, and they don't go on a spree, taking up valuable time from emergency services and causing grief to innocent people.
- frobozz 12y agoFrom the first paragraph: > A 16-year-old male from Ottawa, Canada has been arrested for allegedly making at least 30 fraudulent calls to emergency services across North America over the past few months. Emphasis mine. I would agree with you were the "allegedly" missing, and if instead of "arrested for", it said "convicted of".
- digitalengineer 12y agoIn the US allegedly or not, is besides the point. Everyone confesses and 'takes the deal', guilty or not. "For 2011, the US Department of Justice reported a 93% conviction rate." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate
- JackFr 12y agoThe high rate of convictions for US Attorneys vis a vis state and local prosecutors stems from the higher level of prosecutorial discretion they enjoy. Basically US Attorneys only prosecute slam dunks. From the same source, you'll not that Florida for instance only has a 59% conviction rate.
- bkmartin 12y agoIs that a sign of innocent people pleading guilty or a sign of an efficient judicial system? Got any stats to back up your inference that there are significant amounts of innocent people just pleading guilty? I'm not really sure what the point of your post was, but I don't have the ability to vote it down as irrelevant.
- danielweber 12y agoAs others have pointed out, it's hard to make any conclusions from a high conviction rate. Prosecutors are only supposed to prosecute people if they think the person really did it, and if they think they can convince a jury. Prosecutors aren't supposed to prosecute "just to find out what happens."
- nightpool 12y agoThat doesn't have ANYTHING tto do with the grandparent's comment.
- Wilya 12y agoWhether he is a nice kid or an asshole has nothing to do with how laws against revealing his identity apply.
- Shivetya 12y agoare victims under the same restrictions as the press? What if they are the same as in this case?
- jacquesm 12y agoThen I would say a bit of extra restraint would be appropriate. Especially if the victim has a habit of trying to engage the perps and has set himself up as an extra visible target. Imagine Billy the Kid picking fights with every kid with a gun (yes, sure it would happen the other way around as well but Krebs is doing everything to fan the flames). It's a fine line between crime and entrapment, so when your business depends on having these crimes happen to you then you should be extra careful in how you go about dealing with the perps identities, especially if they are minors.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- Wilya 12y agoMy guess would be that it doesn't matter. The relevant text seems to be [0], and it focuses on the act of publishing, not on who does it. Being a victim doesn't give you any particular rights to publish this information. But the law says nothing about merely telling it to all your friends. And if you're walking the line between these two, it's probably better to talk to a lawyer before speaking. [0] http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/Y-1.5/page-45.html#h-33 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/Y-1.5/page-45.html#h...
- corin_ 12y agoWhere's the line between "the media" and "people personally involved"? For example, if a 14 year old comes up to me on the street and commits a crime (e.g. he mugs me) and I know his name, would I not be allowed to tweet "just got mugged by <his name>"?
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- jzwinck 12y agoYou might tweet it if you did not believe that you'd get any results from reporting it to the police (or already did report it and got no results). For example, when stopped at a red light on my bicycle in Brooklyn, a van intentionally (and maliciously) bumped my rear wheel from behind. The local precinct was two blocks away so I went there with the guy's license plate number. The police declined to file a report, telling me they wouldn't be able to verify who the actual driver was given only the plate number (and time, and description, and a second eye witness). If Twitter had been a thing back then I may well have tweeted about it.
- 15characterlimi 12y agoSerious question here, what do you hope to accomplish by Tweeting something like this? Vigilante justice from fellow bicyclists?
- obsurveyor 12y agoOuting non-responsive public services/companies/etc. on social media gets a reaction these days if you get some traction with re-tweets etc.
- jacquesm 12y agoI am a bit ambivalent about all this. Krebs makes his living by picking fights with people and then writing about it so if you engage him you shouldn't be too surprised to find your name in print. That said he's a bit too eager about it all, there is a 'bring it on' attitude that makes me wonder if most or any of the things that Krebs has happen to him would happen if he didn't make such a circus out of it. It's a bit like a big bruiser going downtown to the clubs and trying to pick fights with every drunk and then bragging later about how many he bagged. And to post the name of the kid before he's convicted (assuming he will be convicted) is out of line and possibly even illegal (he's a minor after all).
- sbarre 12y agoIsn't it more like a big bruiser going down to the shady part of town and trying to pick fights with the muggers and drug dealers? Most of Krebs' targets are carding rings, crackers and other Internet fraudsters and criminals. These aren't clueless people being dumb, these are usually bad people (allegedly) doing intentionally bad things to innocent people.. Also, the kid's name was in the already-published DOX that he linked to in his article. It's not like he was responsible for "outing" this kid's details....
- bkmartin 12y agoOr maybe because of Krebs' notoriety he gets lots of playback from these thugs trying to boost their street cred by pulling one over on him. Its a high risk/high reward game for the thugs, and their egos are blinding them into jail terms.
- danielweber 12y agoSince Krebs doesn't live in Canada, what illegal act may he have committed?
- fixermark 12y agoThe kind that crosses an international boundary but doesn't involve millions of dollars or major political embarrassment for either nation and therefore will never be fairly adjudicated in this generation. ;)
- xeroxmalf 12y ago> "According to the FBI, each swatting incident costs emergency responders approximately $10,000." (from the article) So $10k each, and 30+ times: Make him pay that $300k back.
- dragontamer 12y agoYou joke... but it happens. http://nypost.com/2014/04/23/fbi-helping-to-find-call-of-duty-gamer-behind-swatting-prank-call/ http://nypost.com/2014/04/23/fbi-helping-to-find-call-of-dut... Kid now is getting prosecuted with $100,000 in fines for his swatting attempt. The caller could face multiple charges and may also be required to foot the bill for Tuesday’s police response, which is estimated at $100,000.
- xeroxmalf 12y agoI wasn't joking. He should have to pay back the 'damages' or 'pain and suffering' or whatever terminology you would like.
- colinbartlett 12y agoHe'd only have to sell 10,000 fullz at $30/each.
- downer73 12y agoOh, I'd really like to know where they got that number from first. If it includes the salaries of the officers involved, by allocating the man-hours consumed by each response, then that number needs to be lowered. I'll accept the fact that vehicles consume gallons per mile in gas, and that private residences have to repair busted down doors and damaged sheetrock, and maybe if some other expendables were used, if say some shots were fired and it cost 50 cents in bullets, but the officers would have been on the clock anyway (overtime or no), and the taxes are already budgeted for salaries. Did the counties get sued by the swatted? If that's the source of the number, maybe he owes a large percentage of that, but then again, maybe the lawsuit has a point and how swat teams respond to prank calls should be changed?
- dangoldin 12y agoCurrently in the US when you turn 18 you end up "losing" your juvenile criminal record. A proposal I read that made sense was keeping the juvenile record hidden unless you end up committing a serious crime after 18. Once that happens your juvenile record is opened up again. At least that's an incentive to play it safe after turning 18.
- MetaCosm 12y agoThat isn't really true, and a lot of adults learn this if they got into trouble as kids. The juvenile system has a bent towards privacy, but that is all it is -- a bent. You can either have your juvenile record "sealed" or "expunged" but neither is automatic. Asking for your records to be sealed is possible a number of years after the conviction dependent on location. In most places it is 3 years of no offenses except minor traffic violations and you can request getting juvenile records sealed. Asking for expungement is much more restricted and not even available in most locations. In the rare places expungement is possible it is a long and involved process. Now, here is what sucks more -- getting your records sealed may seem like the obvious choice -- you don't want that shoplifting thing following you around. But, if someone pulls your record and sees "sealed" they are likely going to think you did something FAR worse than shoplifting. Additionally, sealed records don't mean "from everyone forever" -- those suckers can pop up in adult trials if they fit a pattern, if they should apply to sentencing or just if the judge thinks they should. Don't fuck up too much when you are kid, it will haunt you.
- dangoldin 12y agoAh interesting - thanks for clearing this up. Yea that "sealed" record issue seems odd - I would expect it to be more along the lines of not being available rather than sealed so the requester doesn't actually know that a record actually exists.
- Spoom 12y agoAlso there are certain federal agencies which are able to look into sealed (and even expunged or pardoned) records, such as USCIS.
- 12y ago
- jacquesm 12y agoIf it's that easy to get a swat team beating down some innocent persons door then I see bigger problems than a teenager making prank calls. Anonymous phone calls should not lead to people potentially being killed.
- brazzy 12y agoAfter reading the article, it looks like police departments are learning, and it's getting less easy.
- cstuder 12y agoHe wasn't always this lucky, even after reporting the possibility of a swatting at his location to the police before: http://krebsonsecurity.com/2013/03/the-world-has-no-room-for-cowards/ http://krebsonsecurity.com/2013/03/the-world-has-no-room-for...
- hyperpape 12y agoIt's tricky, right? What percentage of anonymous calls are swattings vs. actual hostage situations? It's a dangerously easy tactic, but I still would guess that it's rare relative to actual calls that require a quick response. Certainly, law enforcement needs to be thinking hard about how they response. But it's not obvious to me, as an outsider, how to handle this.
- wpietri 12y agoWhat, from the police's perspective, is the alternative? If they get a credible report of a dangerous situation, they have to take it seriously. The clock starts running the moment their phone rings, so they have limited time for countermeasures. I surely hope they're doing their best to prevent obvious fakes from getting through. They have the incentive; getting pranked by a 16-year-old makes them look like idiots. And I really hope that their procedures and training mean that they're well prepared for situations where they caller was lying, confused, panicked, or just mistaken. But I think mere anonymity shouldn't discourage them much. For a lot of people, calling the police is a complex calculus of risk. Are they safe from the police? Are they safe from retribution from criminals? Are they inviting too much trouble for others? [1] People being anonymous may not be a great sign of a false report. [1] E.g.: http://tressiemc.com/2014/05/02/calling-the-white-mans-police/ http://tressiemc.com/2014/05/02/calling-the-white-mans-polic...
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- ohwp 12y agoIts sad that most of the time the parents are to blame.
- nkozyra 12y agoAnd all of the time the kids are to blame.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- DominikR 12y agoI'm glad that this trend didn't reach Austria, because as annoying as it may seem, swatting can result in deaths of innocents, if the cops are trigger happy or the victim fears that (possibly armed) robbers are breaking into his/her home. This kind of hoax should be punished harshly, even for 15-17 year old juveniles.
- JTon 12y agoWhat punishment do you recommend?
- iLoch 12y agoTen years of community service. :)
- gk1 12y agoWhy ask? This is why we have a judicial system. It may be (very) unfair in some cases, but for the most part they are there to dole out appropriate punishment.
- fixermark 12y agoSomething up to and excluding the punishment equivalent for negligent homicide. ... and that restriction only to avoid the calculus where the punishments are equivalent, so someone getting their jollies by ordering armed responders to an innocent person's house might as well go drop rocks from the local overpass instead.
- pyrrhotech 12y agolife imprisonment
- DanielBMarkham 12y agoTwo things strike me as sad: 1) This type of reckless, non-violent, anti-social behavior in young males has been quite common for all of recorded history. It's a shame it has to involve so much money and international crime nowadays. 2) We remember everything now. No more can you do some bone-headed thing in your teens that cost 400K and got you sent to juvenile hall for a year, then move on with your life. Now it's all over the interwebs. I feel sorry for the guy. Don't get me wrong: this was a lot more dangerous than it seemed to him, and something had to be done. Still, as the author points out, this is a shame.
- danielweber 12y agoIs it really "non-violent" to make the cops think there is a hostage situation going on?
- DanielBMarkham 12y agoFair point, and I debated making that statement. I do not believe this kid was purposefully being violent. I do believe what he did could have had terribly violent results. But until I receive additional information to the contrary, I'm going to assume that he was engaged in a prank -- a very dumb prank.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- comrh 12y agoWhere did all that personal info on the kid come from?
- tragic 12y agoThere's a link in the article - looks like the kid also managed to irritate a slightly more competent black hat crew who dumped all his personal info onto Pastebin. But in general, BK is a very competent journalist who is often able to reconstruct the identities of people in the Russian cybercrime underground. An obnoxious, pimply adolescent in Ontario was unlikely to present him with much in the way of a challenge.
- comrh 12y agoYeah I saw the pastebin dump. I was more asking specifically how does such a large amount of person information be dumped like that.
- tragic 12y agoI guess the answer is that there are ways of finding such things out, that I'd rather not even think about. If you're the sort of person who calls out SWAT teams to people's houses and then brags about it on Twitter, then you're probably going to be found out - either by more serious black hats, or someone like Krebs.
- mjgoins 12y agoThere is zero discussion of accountability for the cops in any of these situations. If they are so easily tricked, they need to either scale back the militarized force they are allowing to be abused, or become more skeptical about these threats.
- mrcharles 12y agoUnfortunately, that isn't an option at all, because the one time they are skeptical wrongly can result in bad shit. The same way that the fire department has to respond to every single fire alarm, even when they are false alarms. You can't choose where you go or what you do when it comes to people's safety.
- angersock 12y ago"can result in bad shit" Lots of things can result in bad shit--but we seem to be looking at the civic equivalent of rheumatoid arthritis. If a fire department shows up without need nobody is put in prison, shot, assaulted, or has their dogs killed.
- dmm 12y agoActually there are many cases where the police completely ignore calls for help and courts have found that police have absolutely no responsibility to protect individuals. The police do however love opportunities to justify large expenditures and fancy equipment. Many courts have upheld this principle: BARILLARI v. MILWAUKEE http://www.leagle.com/decision/1995441194Wis2d247_1431 http://www.leagle.com/decision/1995441194Wis2d247_1431 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia The Court explained that "[t]he duty to provide public services is owed to the public at large, and, absent a special relationship between the police and an individual, no specific legal duty exists."
- superuser2 12y agoNo one would ever be a police officer if police officers were liable for damages every time they were unsuccessful in protecting someone. This is perfectly reasonable.