Jagex Busts Teen for School Shooting Comment

IanDavis

Blue Blaze Irregular 1st Class
Aug 18, 2012
1,152
0
0
Jagex Busts Teen for School Shooting Comment



A teen has been arrested for allegedly threatening to shoot up his school after commenting in an MMO.

Funny thing about the internet, nothing ever really goes away. While MMO chat usually is little more than irritating banter, things stand out occasionally. When someone chatted "I'm shooting up my school tomorrow" in "an online game through Jagex Ltd" (most likely Runescape), people perked up a bit. Players reported the incident to Jagex, who in turn reported it to the police.

The next day, 18-year-old Thomas Frongillo of Oxford, MA was arrested and charged with "threatening to commit a crime and threatening a bombing or hijacking." He was released on $50,000 bail after his arraignment on Thursday.

The transcript provided to the local police reveal that Frongillo also made anti-Semitic comments and drew a "Nazi symbol" in-game. When another player referred to him as a "Jew killer", he's alleged to have responded "If only." Further digging revealed that he previously talked about shooting a squirrel with a .12 shotgun.

According to Frongillo's lawyer, the words were "a harmless jest", and never intended to attack the school where he has a 3.25 GPA. Frongillo is studying criminal justice at the Anna Maria, but apparently never got to the part about not making terrorist threats online.

The local police searched his home and removed several firearms which were legally purchased by Frongillo's father. He can stay at home while out on bail, but has to stay away from the Anna Maria campus and surrender any other guns he might have, as well as his Firearms Identification Card. He's due back in court April 19th.

Source and Picture: [a href=http://www.telegram.com/article/20130411/NEWS/130419919/1116]Telegram and Gazette[/a]

Permalink
 

SpAc3man

New member
Jul 26, 2009
1,197
0
0
What a dickface. He may or may not have been taking the piss but he needed to be made an example of.
 

kajinking

New member
Aug 12, 2009
896
0
0
This seems a bit like common sense, with all that's going on who would honestly joke about that?
 

jollybarracuda

New member
Oct 7, 2011
323
0
0
It's really good the gamers who saw those comments weren't passive about that, they may have just prevented a massacre. They should get some kind of XP boost or something.
 

vrbtny

Elite Member
Sep 16, 2009
1,959
0
41
jollybarracuda said:
It's really good the gamers who saw those comments weren't passive about that, they may have just prevented a massacre. They should get some kind of XP boost or something.
I agree +4x EXP multiplier for a month or something, and some special shiny ingame armour or weapons that sparkle. It's good to see some good news coming out of video games for once...
 

Tiamattt

New member
Jul 15, 2011
557
0
0
Hm, think I'll just edit mine a little.

I'm sorry to all the people that's cheering this, but I really don't like the idea of people being arrested solely on what they say, especially in a online setting where people are used to that anonymous feeling which tends to make people say what they would normally never say/act IRL. And definitely when it's a dumb teen who are known for saying stupid meaningless crap just to try to make themselves look good/superior.

There had to be a better way to deal with this, and I would be extremely surprised if the charges stick, much less gets in front of a jury.
 

knight steel

New member
Jul 6, 2009
1,794
0
0
I don't know how to feel,on one hand this could have prevented a tragedy and the guys sounds horrible..........but on the other hand being arrested for an online comment and brought to trial,sounds really-really-really invasive I mean does that mean that someone who say's "I'm so angry I could kill someone" in the spur of the moment between friends can be arrested?

Like it could easily damage free speech-and before you spout "free speech doesn't give you the right to avoid the consequences of your words-punishing those who say bad things isn't destroying free speech" well in practise it kinda does,I mean by punishing people over what they say you're effectively preventing society from voicing their opinion-after all if the gov said "anyone who disagrees with us vocally will be executed" would be classified as destroying free speech but by the logic stated in the beginning it wouldn't be after all there still allowing you to say it they're not physically preventing you from saying the words just punishing you afterwards.

I know the above example is massive exaggeration but really isn't the same thing just on a much-much-much smaller scale you're still punishing people for what they have said scaring people into not talking/making it reasonable impossible for them to say something. I'm not saying don't do an investigation/keep a close eye on the person but actual going to court over it-sorry I don't like it.
 

piinyouri

New member
Mar 18, 2012
2,708
0
0
Whoawhoawhoawhoawhoa.
Wait, he was arrested for not actually doing anything?
I've now read this article slowly about 4 times and if someone could correct me that would be wonderful but it doesnt seem to me he actually did anything, yet was arrested.

I mean, not the most savory character, yeah okay.
But saying you are going to do something, and actually doing it are still two different things nowadays aren't they?
 

toms

New member
Oct 23, 2008
54
0
0
Considering the amount of times someone has said something like that on the Internet and then gone and done it, reporting it seems like the responsible thing to do.

Besides, people need to learn that anonymity on the Internet is a lie and everything you say out there, stays out there and can and will be used against you.
 

IanDavis

Blue Blaze Irregular 1st Class
Aug 18, 2012
1,152
0
0
It doesn't matter if he did or didn't, simply threatening to do so is a crime. It doesn't matter if you talk about shooting one person or a dozen. It's not as serious a crime as actually doing it, but legally, that's not something that's condoned.

There are many such limits on free speech. Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is another good example.
 

Agayek

Ravenous Gormandizer
Oct 23, 2008
5,178
0
0
piinyouri said:
Whoawhoawhoawhoawhoa.
Wait, he was arrested for not actually doing anything?
I've now read this article slowly about 4 times and if someone could correct me that would be wonderful but it doesnt seem to me he actually did anything, yet was arrested.

I mean, not the most savory character, yeah okay.
But saying you are going to do something, and actually doing it are still two different things nowadays aren't they?
Threatening to attack someone, their property, etc is illegal in the US. I forget the actual classification, but it basically boils down to "Your free speech ends where the next guy's peace of mind begins". Whether or not you actually agree that that should be the case, that is the way the law is currently set up.

It's not normally enforced unless it's obvious the threat was serious, but with the recent media attention on school shootings, I'm not surprised they overreacted slightly to this.

OT:
I'm of two minds on this particular thing. On the one, it was a guy making dumb comments on the internet. If that was illegal, half the first world would be in jail. I find it incredibly dumb to hold people liable for something they almost certainly didn't mean.

On the other, I can't help but support anything that will make people stop being such incredible fuckwits online. Maybe next time this guy will think twice before making an ass of himself.
 

piinyouri

New member
Mar 18, 2012
2,708
0
0
Agayek said:
piinyouri said:
Whoawhoawhoawhoawhoa.
Wait, he was arrested for not actually doing anything?
I've now read this article slowly about 4 times and if someone could correct me that would be wonderful but it doesnt seem to me he actually did anything, yet was arrested.

I mean, not the most savory character, yeah okay.
But saying you are going to do something, and actually doing it are still two different things nowadays aren't they?
Threatening to attack someone, their property, etc is illegal in the US. I forget the actual classification, but it basically boils down to "Your free speech ends where the next guy's peace of mind begins". Whether or not you actually agree that that should be the case, that is the way the law is currently set up.

It's not normally enforced unless it's obvious the threat was serious, but with the recent media attention on school shootings, I'm not surprised they overreacted slightly to this.

OT:
I'm of two minds on this particular thing. On the one, it was a guy making dumb comments on the internet. If that was illegal, half the first world would be in jail. I find it incredibly dumb to hold people liable for something they almost certainly didn't mean.

On the other, I can't help but support anything that will make people stop being such incredible fuckwits online. Maybe next time this guy will think twice before making an ass of himself.
I am familiar with how the country is in regards to things like this, but I guess I didn't see the broadcast or read the pamphlet when we went from:
*someone says they are going to do something bad*
*they are investigated heavily*
*if proof is found, THEN action can be taken*


I guess I was just actually unaware we've gotten to the point now where we just cut out the middle bit and the need for proof.
I was unaware at just how much(to a degree) it's become the kind of nation all the conspiracy nuts have been babbling about for years.
Gotta love my country.
 

Voxgizer

New member
Jan 12, 2011
255
0
0
piinyouri said:
Agayek said:
piinyouri said:
Whoawhoawhoawhoawhoa.
Wait, he was arrested for not actually doing anything?
I've now read this article slowly about 4 times and if someone could correct me that would be wonderful but it doesnt seem to me he actually did anything, yet was arrested.

I mean, not the most savory character, yeah okay.
But saying you are going to do something, and actually doing it are still two different things nowadays aren't they?
Threatening to attack someone, their property, etc is illegal in the US. I forget the actual classification, but it basically boils down to "Your free speech ends where the next guy's peace of mind begins". Whether or not you actually agree that that should be the case, that is the way the law is currently set up.

It's not normally enforced unless it's obvious the threat was serious, but with the recent media attention on school shootings, I'm not surprised they overreacted slightly to this.

OT:
I'm of two minds on this particular thing. On the one, it was a guy making dumb comments on the internet. If that was illegal, half the first world would be in jail. I find it incredibly dumb to hold people liable for something they almost certainly didn't mean.

On the other, I can't help but support anything that will make people stop being such incredible fuckwits online. Maybe next time this guy will think twice before making an ass of himself.
I am familiar with how the country is in regards to things like this, but I guess I didn't see the broadcast or read the pamphlet when we went from:
*someone says they are going to do something bad*
*they are investigated heavily*
*if proof is found, THEN action can be taken*


I guess I was just actually unaware we've gotten to the point now where we just cut out the middle bit.
Gotta love my country.
You must've missed this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting] then. As fresh as that is in our country's collective mind, I'm not really surprised by the actions taken.

He said something stupid, but did he mean it? I can't say. I don't know, but it doesn't change the fact that even joking about shooting up a school after what happened in Connecticut is absolutely asinine. Especially so soon after the fact.

Do I agree with the actions taken? I'm in the same boat as Agayek there.
 

Agayek

Ravenous Gormandizer
Oct 23, 2008
5,178
0
0
piinyouri said:
I am familiar with how the country is in regards to things like this, but I guess I didn't see the broadcast or read the pamphlet when we went from:
*someone says they are going to do something bad*
*they are investigated heavily*
*if proof is found, THEN action can be taken*


I guess I was just actually unaware we've gotten to the point now where we just cut out the middle bit and the need for proof.
I was unaware at just how much(to a degree) it's become the kind of nation all the conspiracy nuts have been babbling about for years.
Gotta love my country.
It's never been like that. If someone is charged with a crime, they can and will be arrested, pending investigation.

That's exactly what happened here. He was charged with "threatening to commit a crime and threatening a bombing or hijacking", and was arrested for it. Now the police are investigating the alleged crime and compiling evidence and preparing a case against him.

In the meantime, he's free to either sit in jail, or post bail and return to his home to await trial. Once the investigation is complete, the case will be brought to trial and a verdict will be reached and the judge will decide punishment.

That's the way our legal system has always been. All it takes is the accusation to arrest someone.

Of course, there's a bunch of penalties for falsely charging someone with a crime, so the cops are generally pretty cautious about that until they have solid evidence already. That's why I called it an overreaction in my last post.
 

Deathfish15

New member
Nov 7, 2006
579
0
0
Tiamattt said:
Hm, think I'll just edit mine a little.

I'm sorry to all the people that's cheering this, but I really don't like the idea of people being arrested solely on what they say, especially in a online setting where people are used to that anonymous feeling which tends to make people say what they would normally never say/act IRL. And definitely when it's a dumb teen who are known for saying stupid meaningless crap just to try to make themselves look good/superior.

There had to be a better way to deal with this, and I would be extremely surprised if the charges stick, much less gets in front of a jury.

Charges will stick because the evidence. There was no illegal search and seizure as the company (Jangex) freely gave information from their own data base. Also, there are things such as User Agreements that mention a player should NOT use the services for the purposes of illegal activity (and saying you're going to shoot up your school is a prime example of an illegal activity).



It's not a matter of just 'what a person says', but the context of what's being said...



Examples:

-A) "I wish my school would burn down."

-B) "I hate my school."

-C) "I'm going to burn my school to the ground tomorrow."



In examples A and B, they're nothing but open free speech and wishful thinking. Even example A is not a threat, but just along the lines of wishing that someone you know would get struck by lightning (i.e. have really bad luck). Example C, however, is an over-the-line threat that is not protected under the 1st Amendment. A threat of physical harm, attack, violence, or other such misconduct that shall impose danger to other human beings and put their physical well being in trouble is considered a crime. Because as such, the police cannot read minds (yet) and cannot tell whether your threats are empty or real; all threats treated equally as harmful.
 

Smooth Operator

New member
Oct 5, 2010
8,162
0
0
I see proportional responses aren't just missing in the internets world, if everyone went to jail for bad jokes well then every living person would end up there at some point.
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,651
0
0
A couple of things I'd like to say about this.

It was good that the people on the server reported him. You never know when you might be dealing with a lunatic on the internet. Of course the chances of someone being an actual lunatic are slim, but it's not something that you should just ignore.
On the other hand, $50,000 bail seems just ridiculous. If you can't prove that he wasn't joking then you have to let him go. "Innocent until proven guilty" is there to protect everyone from the tyrannical judiciary system. If you keep locking people up because they were joking, pretty soon you'll have a nation of people too scared to joke. It's insane.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
My basic opinion is that I hope both Jagex and Massachusetts (the state where this took place) get sued to near oblivion.

The guy is an asshole to be honest, but I'm a big believer in free speech, and common sense being used to interpet the law as well. Things like time, place, and context matter. To me this is the same as someone in school drawing a gun, or writing a horror story where analogies to people in his school die (a lot of writers use locations they are familiar with and characters based on people they know for stories), or whatever else. He was being a dumbarse in an MMO chat trying to troll and get a rise out of people, to threaten his school he would have had to direct it to the school, and to be honest I believe in an MMO there is a degree of privacy expected when your using an anonymous handle/character name. In a case like this it runs an odd combination where the expected anonimity of the game itself, combined with a public channel within that game, makes the threat posed extremely unlikely. Likewise, while I might not agree with the statements themselves, part of free speech is to be as racist as you want to be, people might not agree with you, and ostracize you because of your comments, but you do have the right to make them.

To be blunt this guy deserved to be added to a bunch of /ignore lists, but when Jagex got involved and then outed him to the police for being an idiot and trying to get a rise out of people, that was going too far. What's more the police wasting time, effort, and resources on something like this is pretty stupid.

I kind of get how things like "Sandy Hook" affected people, and the influance "Columbine" had on things beforehand, but really, some kind of common sense has to be used, and this kind of "police state" behavior is exactly what the US is not supposed to have. If the goverment wants to react like this it should try and justify declaring martial law, otherwise in peacetime it generally needs to blow off.

I say this because I confess to finding a degree of amusement from a good troll (no matter how "wrong") while grinding in an MMO, even if I don't do it myself. The "toxin" of things like WoW's "Barrens Chat" continues because it's a tradition and because people on both sides find it amusing, and it helps pass the time in one of the longer and more grind-tastic progression zones in WoW. It sounds odd, but I think the last thing we need is a precedent for MMO companies turning in players for stupid comments like this, which will lead to paranoia in MMO channels and such, which will lead to everyone being on guard all the time... and really I think things will be poorer for it. What's more I'll be honest in saying that while the police might have been in line to perhaps question the kid, or scope out the school at the time the shooting was supposed to take place, making an arrest for being a jerk in an MMO and no other evidence apparently sounds like the kind of idiocy I'd expect from the Waffen SS and citizen informers in Nazi Germany (here goes Godwin's Law!) not in the US.

I mean god forbid, I ordered a Steampunk Fairy statue last year and it showed up at my house broken, and I made some rather violent and anti-social comments about what I wanted to do to both the post office and the vendor I ordered from (since it's hard to say whose fault it was). If Jagex heard me, they would probably have complainted to the point where the state would be wheeling me into the court room in Hannibal Lector type restraintsl, screaming I was the worst terrorist since Bin Ladin.