Judge Refuses To Dismiss League of Legends Terrorist Threat Case

Mr_Spanky

New member
Jun 1, 2012
152
0
0
Looking through this thread it's becoming pretty obvious that freedom of speech is pretty much dead. I get it was a tasteless thing to say but to actually try and prosecute this guy on ANY level (least of all with potential incarceration at the end of it) is patently ridiculous.

And honestly I can't even be bothered to qualify that - as far as I'm concerned if you don't see how dumb (and frankly very dangerous as a precedent) this is you aren't worth the time to convince.

But seriously guys jailtime for that? If you think that's right you know precisely jack all about what justice is or how it's supposed to work.
 

Pinky's Brain

New member
Mar 2, 2011
290
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
It looked like a threat and was treated as such.
It looked like a threat to someone who was either extremely naive or stupid.

Now I admit there are enough such people in the world to treat statements directed specifically at them a bit special, but to protect them against getting terrorised by non-direct statements which no one the least bit worldly could construe as a threat is beyond the pale.

The officer should just have told whoever reported him that they appreciated the report but that in their professional opinion it was clearly meant as morbid humour and required no more follow up. The DA should have told the police to get a grip much less nicely. The judge should have told the DA to get a grip much less nicely still.

The republican (wild guess) voters who put the Judge in office should tell their party to never put that moron up for election again.
 

Nathan Rice

New member
Jul 19, 2012
2
0
0
Objectable said:
And this is why you shouldn't be stupid.
Don't be stupid people.
Kind of difficult these days, due to a school system that's being undermined in favor of a private, for profit one. Not to mention reality TV, no solid parenting going on (or so it would seem, anyway), and the nearly non-existent mental health system we so dearly need. You know... basic, fundamental society stuff.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Pinky said:
It looked like a threat to someone who was either extremely naive or stupid.
And as much as you want to marginalise anyone who disagrees with you, I seriously doubt you could pick this out from a nutjob who followed through. And sadly, this isn't the first time I've made this point. But somehow, everyone who disagrees is either stupid or naive.
 

Someone Depressing

New member
Jan 16, 2011
2,417
0
0
I can't stop laughing, I'm struggling to type this. Oh God..

But no. He shouldn't be convicted. He was an idiot for saying that. But still, being put in jail for making an ill-advised comment is kind of like putting Jimmy in the juvie because he isn't eating his greens.

I've also made a few comments like this in real life, although I had no idea what was wrong with them. Thankyou, schizotypal disorder, you're my only friend.
 

Pinky's Brain

New member
Mar 2, 2011
290
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
I seriously doubt you could pick this out from a nutjob who followed through.
Maybe, can you provide me with a single example containing obvious hyperbole and calling it out as a joke specifically?
 

SamTheNewb

New member
Apr 16, 2013
53
0
0
Doomsdaylee said:
Says the person who doesn't read any further than directly under his nose. I think it's deserving of 3 months, tops.
I find the irony in your post upsetting. Since he has spent 4.5 months in custody already.
 

Areloch

It's that one guy
Dec 10, 2012
623
0
0
Oh man, I was hoping I would get to play this game.

Zachary Amaranth said:
"in Soviet America, I'm going to shoot up a school."
Hang on guys, I think Zachary is going to shoot up a school somewhere. I need to call the cops.

See how easy that was?

Obviously, if someone did some research on you and your post, they'd conclude the "threat" was groundless. But that's part of the problem.
Did this get looked into before he got tossed in jail? Would you have been?
 

marioandsonic

New member
Nov 28, 2009
657
0
0
Stupid and tasteless thing to say, but 8 years in prison for this would be even more stupid.

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
 

Dollabillyall

New member
Jul 18, 2012
97
0
0
Soooo... basically somebody got jailed for being sarcastic? Hipsters beware...
Also, don't go on holiday to the USA. You have a better chance of surviving bad taste comments in North frickin' Korea.
 

option1soul

New member
Nov 17, 2013
20
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
I
thought that's why we have that "freedom of speech" thing, so that our government can't police what we say. I guess the constitution doesn't mean much anymore.
Oh dear Lord.

Free speech doesn't have universal ramification. You cannot threaten, you cannot call for someone's death, you cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater, and so on. And adding "lol jk" to it (and after the fact, I might add) doesn't mean that people aren't going to see it as a threat.

If you jokingly threaten to kill someone, the authorities aren't guaranteed to see it that way, and this neither violates freedom of speech nor is it something new.

f you're going to talk about free speech and the Constitution, know what it says and what it means. Arguments like these do more to devalue free speech than anyone involved in this case is likely to. Now, one could argue about other portions of the Constitution, since the bail was pretty unreasonable, the charges seem harsh, and there have been questions raised about due process, but that's another story (and not all of it confirmed).

Free speech does not mean freedom from consequences, nor does it mean freedom to threaten...
Actually, it does... Or it's supposed to. Shouting "fire" in a crowded theater is something different. This was neither a threat nor calling for someone's death nor "inciting imminent lawless action". If what you claim is true than every single person who says "I'm going to kick his ass" would be held on legal grounds; not to mention the amount of depraved hate and violent speech that passes for normal on websites, forums, and gaming blog sites.

This was his personal facebook page, he was using OBVIOUS hyperbole ("eat their still-beating hearts"), and he was responding to someone's harassing comments (regardless of how "bad" the comment was or wasn't). He didn't threaten anyone directly, didn't show intent, and didn't infringe on anyone's rights.

This is EXACTLY what kind of free speech is supposed to be protected by the constitution. I'm shocked that you claim to "know what it says and it means" but seem to think we wouldn't be able to say things like this. I guess the fear has already started to take over... But maybe I shouldn't say that too loud, hmm?

I was incorrect, it was actually (according to the initial report) a woman from Canada who decided to take action about it... Which makes it even worse when you think about it.
 

Little Gray

New member
Sep 18, 2012
499
0
0
How stupid do you have to be to "joke" about shooting up a school when several schools were recently shot up in a country that was already insanely paranoid about this type of shit. I say the gene pool will be better off if this kid spends some more time behind bars.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
So they're going to ruin years of his life because of one comment? The legal system in this country is a joke.

Also can someone please explain to me how dozens of people can harass a female developer and threaten her kids and people will just say "don't feed the trolls" but when someone makes a joke about shooting up a school they talk about how good it is that he's getting prosecuted?
 

Wolf In A Bear Suit

New member
Jun 2, 2012
519
0
0
I signed the petition on this months ago. What a pile of idiotic shit this case is. If it was fair game to arrest someone for tasteless comments I would be long gone. It's evidence of the dawn of a censorship state which can't distinguish a real threat.
 

Altorin

Jack of No Trades
May 16, 2008
6,976
0
0
In my morality, "threat" isn't even really a thing, unless the threat itself causes some undue harm to another person.

Was anyone unjustly harmed by this "threat"? Did the schools see the threat and LOCK DOWN and cause a huge public panic costing thousands of dollars in just panic awareness uptime? No. Someone saw his facebook post and turned him in. I don't even blame her. If I saw that on my facebook, I'd probably be pretty offended by the person that said it - I've been utterly offended on facebook before, it does happen - and if I didn't know that person well enough to understand that they're joking around.. like if just some random person on my facebook said that, I'd probably consider bringing it up. That's a justified action I think.

The unjustified action here really dealt with the police department's behavior and just the entire way this case was handled. The truth of the matter is, the ONLY person who was unjustly harmed by this kids actions are him and his family. Noone else suffered for his words. That's really it. Not another person was actually "threatened". The justice system basically bullied this kid, stripped his rights away, treated him like garbage for no good reason.

So basically it's that. Context is everything, and the truth of the matter is about measuring actual facts, not just pondering that these LoL trolls need a martyr and that you're going to teach this kid a lesson about watching his mouth. I really don't want the state standing over me with a bar of soap like an angry mom with a foul mouthed kid. That's not how the modern world works. It might have flown when you didn't have a 24 hour news feed in your pocket constantly. Never would have heard of this before the internet. There would be no real way to even have this discussion before the internet.. So I'll grant you that this is probably how it's worked in the past. But now? Fuck that.

At the end of the day you have to, or rather should have to, measure the victims. That's how you know justice has been served. The balanced scales have been a symbol and metaphor for our notion of a system of Justice since the freaking ancient greeks. If it turns out that in fact the only victim of his crime is himself, then that's hardly a crime. If he caused damages, that's another thing entirely. That just doesn't seem to be the case here.

OT: as for this newest bump in the story, regarding the Judge, that's unfortunate, but that's his call really. He's a Judge. If he wants to see the evidence, he gets to see the evidence. Hopefully for the kids sake the judge falls on this side of the fence, but Judges aren't renowned as a profession for their lenient and understanding natures, sadly, lol
 

not_you

Don't ask, or you won't know
Mar 16, 2011
479
0
0
Alleged_Alec said:
His comment was clearly made in jest, for fuck's sake, you bunch of humourless fucks."
Again, you can't just say shit like that and expect to get away with it...
no matter how many "lol" or "jk" you put on the end...
Serious threats deserve serious consequences
 

BarbaricGoose

New member
May 25, 2010
796
0
0
reiniat said:
"The kid was obviously making a joke"
I DONT CARE, maybe we can send him to jail, and use him as a exemplary punishment for all the scum that inhabits the internet... You pussy ones, who hide cowardly behind a screen, THOU SHALT BE PUNISHED.

Thats at least my opinion.
This is eight years off a kid's life. Or four with parole, I guess. I don't know what punishment would be appropriate, but I do know that eight years, or even four, ain't.

It WOULD be one thing if this would deter people from being assholes, but it won't. In fact, it's been proven that making an example out of someone does not deter other... "Criminals." It's been proven in so many ways, with so many different crimes. Just look at piracy. There have been disgusting stories where some people have been charged hundreds of thousands of dollars by record companies for each $0.99 song they illegally downloaded, but has that stopped piracy? No. People have been jailed for pirating games, but has that stopped piracy? Nope. Evidence is everywhere that making an example out of someone does NOTHING to deter future crimes.

And our prisons are already full, and the recidivism rate is high. We don't need to throw some stupid kid who made a stupid joke in there with the hardened criminals. Or, you know, the other stupid kids we've locked up for stupid reason. We throw him in there, and statistically, he's a higher chance of going back than not. Why turn him into a criminal when we could teach him the lesson that this sort of thing is not okay, WITHOUT ruining his future?