Judge Refuses To Dismiss League of Legends Terrorist Threat Case

[option1soul]

Serves that little shit right. Tasteless jokes in private are one thing, tasteless jokes on a platform that is known for ruining lifes is just stupid.

Some of ya'll seem to forget he was getting harassed first. Not to mention, wasn't it a family member of the person who initially harassed him that kickstarted this legal issue?

I agree he said something stupid, but who here can say they've never said something mean or stupid when someone was bothering us. "Severs that little shit right" is just as stupid and mean. Hes just a kid who made a mistake.

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.

 

[WWmelb]

Snip

Yeah, you've made tasteless jokes (IN PRIVATE) and we've all said stupid things. But look at the context. We didn't say: "I'm going to blow up a building." directly after 9/11. If you don't think you should be arrested for this shit, go to a cop and tell him your going to shoot him in the face, then tell him you were "just kidding." Enjoy the tazeing.
Now, that being said, yes, 8 years is fucking stupid. But he deserves some fucking jail time, or at least a damn bug house, up to 3 months though.

The only merit to what you have to say is now this is going to make him a real criminal. But that's a different argument all together.

Big fucking difference. Directly threatening a specific individual to their face is very different to a tasteless all encompassing comment on facebook.

I disagree he deserves ANY jail time for this. As for public... well, i don't use facebook, but aren't your comments on your facebook page pretty much private? I don't really know, serious question there.

 

[Dark Knifer]

We'll have to see what the conviction is in the end.

A fine or something similar could be useful after this whole scary ordeal to encourage him to be more tasteful in what he says but if by some fluke he gets the maximum sentence then he's fucked for life.

But that's unlikely I like to think.

 

[Hawk eye1466]

He deserves the stress and fear he'll probably go through during the trial but not jail, the best thing would be to let the trial go through and when the jury says guilty the judge gives him all 8 years says jk lol and then gives him some community service.

 

[Caiphus]

You can understand the police investigating the claim; police generally get shafted by the media after every school shooting. One inquiry that usually gets drawn out is "should the police have known anything?".

At this point, it should be clear in hindsight that the facebook post was made in jest and that the kid had no intention of shooting up a school. I know I've said much worse in private chats on the Internet, and indeed in private conversation in real life. I don't know how public the post was, but even if it was visible to everyone, it's not analogous to shouting fire in a theater, or something. There's no immediate danger or panic caused by making a post on facebook. And even shouting fire won't get you convicted for 8 years; it gets you a fine.

In any case, it's fine that the trial is continuing, I guess, since the poor kid is no longer in jail. I dunno, I can't really blame the judge for not throwing the case out. I would blame the prosecution for attempting to continue. But it will be an injustice if the kid is found guilty of anything, unless the police have any more proof that we haven't seen.

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

Yeah, I'm easily on the side of "this kid should be compensated for all this crap, rather than jailed".

Black comedy (which this clearly was) is not something that should be punishable on a legal level, regardless of how soon it was made after a tragedy. The fact that no specifics whatsoever were given to make it an actual threat (no specific target, date, location, etc.) and that it was clearly established as a (albeit crude and insensitive) joke through both the "eat the still-beating heart" nonsense and the "lol, jk" means that this case really should not have any grounds whatsoever.

It is not illegal to be an asshole nor should it be, contrary to what some people on this thread seem to think.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

And this is why you shouldn't be stupid.
Don't be stupid people.

So now we're not allowed to make jokes on the internet? Did the entire world turn into one giant fascist wet dream while I was asleep?

This case is stupid. Judge too.

 

[AldUK]

This kid deserves to be told he's a little shit by everyone under the sun. And his parents should prevent him from going online for a while as a punishment. That should be the end of it. This whole case has been completely overblown and it seriously worries me that some people would consider the treatment of this ignorant kid as justice. You might not be so quick to condemn if it was you that made a silly remark one day which led to arrest.

 

[Do4600]

Why? Because how else are we going to be able to tell the people who are serious from the people who are "jk". School shootings are happening at an increasing number. This is a new reality. If someone makes a threat like this, we need to be able to respond to it and make sure that another tally isn't added to the list.

Sarcasm about something specific should now be punishable with eight years in prison? Are we now so paranoid as a society that a comment made in the public sphere to no one in particular and read out of context counts as a threat against the state? This is what 9/11 did, they planted a seed and paranoia is the fruit we're now all eatting.

By your reasoning, if I quoted exactly what he said here without the quotations I should go to prison for eight years because I was making a terrorist threat. Why? Because this context, these words that I'm typing right now have no meaning to the system of justice you're advocating. It's all empty context, and everything YOU say or type is JUST as empty to that system of justice as long as you make a bizarre allusion to violence.

Funny thing is, all these people crying about how he should be left alone would be doing the exact opposite, (I.E. "Why didn't they lock him up, he even said he was, who's stupid enough to ignore that on just a "jk, lol.") if he actually did go shoot up a school.

No, I would not be saying the opposite, I would be pointing to the other hundreds of thousands of bizarre violent threats that are posted on the internet everyday that have come to exactly nothing and pointing out that it's silly to try to judge the intent of a human being from a few scraps of text in a forum. It's obviously an unreliable method of determining intent if a few hundred thousand threats are posted daily and only one was acted upon this year. Also, I doubt that anybody who ever shot up a school publicized it first on facebook with "lol" and "j/k"

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

snip-a-dee-doo-dah, snip-a-dee-yay

I think you misunderstood me. Specifically, where I disagreed with the harshness of the potential sentence. I don't actually think this guy should serve jail time for a statement he made. I'm just saying that I can understand where the officers of the law are coming from, and that the defendant isn't totally innocent of doing anything wrong. A fine would be sufficient, I think. Maybe not even a harsh fine. Just enough to let him know that making jokes on Facebook about shooting up a school is...well, not really cool.

Edit: Also, it's all well and good to assume he's not serious. However, without any context, it's just as possible he was being serious, and just using jk and lol to disguise that. That's the issue with chatting online. Sarcasm does not work well in text, and neither does black humor.

 

[Vale]

Ha. This kid is lightweight compared to me. But he didn't actually intend to do any of what he typed into the chat sarcastically, and neither do I wish to incinerate everybody that can't beat my CS.
Authorities don't much care though. And that's fine. You don't have any rights. You don't deserve any respect or dignity. This statement was not sarcasm.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

snip-a-dee-doo-dah, snip-a-dee-yay

I think you misunderstood me. Specifically, where I disagreed with the harshness of the potential sentence. I don't actually think this guy should serve jail time for a statement he made. I'm just saying that I can understand where the officers of the law are coming from, and that the defendant isn't totally innocent of doing anything wrong. A fine would be sufficient, I think. Maybe not even a harsh fine. Just enough to let him know that making jokes on Facebook about shooting up a school is...well, not really cool.

Exactly.
Also, sick "Last Res0rt" avy.

Oh, my God, someone actually recognized it! Yay, Last Res0rt fans!

 

[WWmelb]

snip-a-dee-doo-dah, snip-a-dee-yay

I think you misunderstood me. Specifically, where I disagreed with the harshness of the potential sentence. I don't actually think this guy should serve jail time for a statement he made. I'm just saying that I can understand where the officers of the law are coming from, and that the defendant isn't totally innocent of doing anything wrong. A fine would be sufficient, I think. Maybe not even a harsh fine. Just enough to let him know that making jokes on Facebook about shooting up a school is...well, not really cool.

Edit: Also, it's all well and good to assume he's not serious. However, without any context, it's just as possible he was being serious, and just using jk and lol to disguise that. That's the issue with chatting online. Sarcasm does not work well in text, and neither does black humor.

May very well have misunderstood, sorry about that.

And yes, i agree things can be completely skewed with written things online etc, and intent can be lost or misconstrued easily enough. Which is why i don't text message anything serious. Too many things taken the wrong way over the years.

I have no problem with an investigation into his comment, but from all the reports i've read on this case, there was little to no investigation into intent or a pattern of comments, or anything to give any evidence against this being just an ill-timed comment with bad taste coating it like a ham glaze.. mm ham.. christmas..

i'm sitting on here christmas morning discussing someone half a world away who may be going to prison..

i can't decide if that is sad, or good for justice that it means that much to me... on christmas...

to be fair i have a roast pork in the oven cooking for lunch... and chicken to go in soon..

now where was i?

That's right i'm going to blow up a building with a glazed ham and roast pork...

 

[WWmelb]

He deserves the stress and fear he'll probably go through during the trial but not jail, the best thing would be to let the trial go through and when the jury says guilty the judge gives him all 8 years says jk lol and then gives him some community service.

Okay, that stress would be pretty good poetic justice. But i'm an evil little fucker lol

 

[Sectan]

It's been said in these threads before by others and I'll say it again. The kid is a little shit. He should have had the cops come to his house, sit his ass down and drill into his head that you don't say shit like that. Any prison time completely oversteps the bounds of common sense. I'm guessing this kid isn't even old enough to drink and you're going to charge him with terroristic threats when he's trash talking on Facebook and then throw in into prison with murderers and rapists? Now maybe if he showed definite signs of some mental illness and had a history of violence I could see this being seen as a threat "Somehow".

 

[Gitty101]

Okay, the guy is an Ultra Class Level 5 Douche, but he shouldn't be convicted for comments made online. An investigation I could understand, but a jail sentence for a tasteless comment seems a little extreme.

 

[GAunderrated]

Poor dumb kid is going to get convicted not because the judge believes he is guilty, but rather the states have a quota to fill for inmates in private prisons. Fun read for those who want to learn more.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-prison-industry-in-the-united-states-big-business-or-a-new-form-of-slavery/8289

 

[Pyrian]

Wow, it's bad enough (yet unsurprising) that the judicial system in Texas lacks basic reading comprehension, but apparently it's quite rare in this thread, too. He did not make a terrorist threat, period; he sarcastically opined that he's not crazy. Punishing that is a straight-up free-speech issue; as there's no remotely credible threat - nor indeed any threat at all, properly speaking - his only offense is speaking on the subject. Many of you people want this guy to be legally punished for merely bringing up the subject of school shooting, as if "too soon" was a legal doctrine rather than a taste issue. (And in the U.S., it's always too soon after a school shooting these days, which means it never is. It's just too common now.)

You're speaking out against basic requirements of freedom.

 

[Abomination]

And this is why you shouldn't be stupid.
Don't be stupid people.

oh, let's dare to be stupid.


I will point out that this kid only made threats and is facing eight years in jail.


In Texas, a sixteen year old killed four people, caused severe brain injury to another while drunk driving.

HE GOT PROBATION.

why? because he has 'affluezna', the idea that he was too rich to know the difference between good and bad.


this is the U.S. Judicial system people. kill four people and you can get off scott free if you have money, make a off-color joke and you can end up in jail for eight years.

Ah, America, land of the free (if you have money).

Clearly the solution is to nuke the place and start from scratch again. Or is that a terrorist threat and I'll be arr- oh wait, I'm in New Zealand. We won't even give the US Kim Dot Com. Guess you'll have to be satisfied with taking out your anger on harmless teenagers.

 

[Ticklefist]

So we'll piss and moan all day about the mythical "twelve year old" who talks shit in online games but as soon as one gets caught we change our tune?