Slashdot Mirror
Man Accused of Trying To Sell Kids On Craigslist
crimeandpunishment writes "You can get a lot of good deals on Craigslist, apparently including children. A New York State man has been arrested for allegedly trying to sell his children on the online marketplace. From the article: 'State Police Investigator Bryan Blum said Joshua A. Stagnitto, 24, was charged with one count of third-degree falsely reporting an incident, a misdemeanor, after a report was made to Monroe County Child Protective Services advising them of the posting on the online marketplace. The posting indicated a person was selling their children. Police said an investigation revealed Stagnitto was the source of the posting.'"
Oh dang, the punchline is the title... What do I put in the body?
Mr Stagnitto claims to have a Slashdot UID in the low 5 digits.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Freecycle.org would have been better.
"Common sense will be the death of us all"
Am I the only one that notices that the summary contradicts the title? Title says he was arrested for selling his kids, summary says he made a fake posting for selling his kids and prank called the police about it. WTF samzenpus, more sloshed than usual today?
The charge doesn't make sense to me. I read the article, and I don't understand what the charge means. I would think that "falsely reporting an incident" would be something like calling 911 when you don't have an emergency. Or perhaps it would be reporting to police that you were mugged by someone, when you were not actually mugged at all. He made a joke post on craiglist about selling his kids, and he gets hit with a charge of "falsely reporting an incident?"
N.Y.S. Penal Code
240.50 Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.
A person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless, he:
1. Initiates or circulates a false report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime, catastrophe or emergency under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public alarm or inconvenience will result; or
2. Reports, by word or action, to an official or quasi-official agency or organization having the function of dealing with emergencies involving danger to life or property, an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a catastrophe or emergency which did not in fact occur or does not in fact exist; or
3. Gratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency (a) the alleged occurrence of an offense or incident which did not in fact occur; or (b) an allegedly impending occurrence of an offense or incident which in fact is not about to occur; or (c) false information relating to an actual offense or incident or to the alleged implication of some person therein; or
4. Reports, by word or action, to the statewide central register of child abuse and maltreatment, as defined in title six of article six of the social services law, an alleged occurrence or condition of child abuse or maltreatment which did not in fact occur or exist.
Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.
I guess they'll attempt to prove that he "[i]nitiate[d] or circulate[d] a false report or warning of an...impending occurrence of a crime...under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public...inconvenience will result." Or they would if he doesn't plea bargain. This law seems to have awfully wide applicability.
So now it's illegal to have a sketchy sense of humor? Isn't this sort of thing protected by the First Amendment? It's not like he actually went through with trying to enslave his kids or anything.
Here's hoping a judge tosses this pile of nonsense quickly.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
You're under arrest for child cruelty, child endangerment, depriving children of food, selling children as food and misrepresenting the weight of livestock.
"goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
Who would want to buy a self inducing debt system? That's the worst deal on craigslist.
Defective Logic
CPS has a monopoly in trafficking children that people actually want. The government doesn't like competition!
It's really hard to tell exactly what's going on here based on this messed up article, but I think I've figured it out: Santiago makes a hoax posting on craigslist hoping for a media firestorm. Nobody notices. Santiago reports the posting to Child Protective Services intending to stoke the fire. Police figure out he's the guy that made the original posting which is obviously a joke and charge him with making a false report for wasting their time.
Am I close?
No... it never said he reported it. He caused alarm by posting the fake ad and they’re charging him with a misdemeanor.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
http://www.kptv.com/news/15717620/detail.html
strange world we live in!
Adoption is supposed to be in the child's best interest, while selling is is supposed to be in the buyer and seller's best interests. I will now summarize the next response, to save time.
"HUUURRRR DUUURG adoption is BAD becuz the GOVERNMENT fucks it up!"
*sigh* no. It's not illegal and he wasn't charged with "trying to sell his kids on CL." The title contradicts the body.
(sorry not going to use the word dude for a possible child seller)
...What the hell are you talking about?
Its in idle, what did you expect? If you don't like it, stop browsing idle.slashdot.org ...
Fail.
Because he falsely reported that he was selling his kids.
In any case, turning someone in isn’t illegal. Not even turning yourself in, which is what he’d have been doing if he reported his own ad. The ad was illegal; reporting it was not.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
But... turning yourself in if you're not guilty would be illegal.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
Why is if when I click on comments to Idle topics rather than just expanding the comment on this page it opens it in a new window? It's been doing this for months and I've realise it's never going to get fixed so am I the only one getting this?
He was guilty. Of posting the false ad. And that is what he was charged with.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
"I went to the movie theatre. The sign said 'Children 12 and under - $5.00'. I said, 'Give me two girls and a boy.'"
nt
<Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
If you don't clean up your room SO HELP ME I'll SELL YOU on CRAIGSLIST!!!
Now, rent one, maybe, if the terms weren't too picky about the state of the child on return... =p
when my children were naughty when selling them looked very attractive ......
Not sure how folks couldn't spot this as a hoax right off the bat. A real advertisment would have offered *paying* someone to take the children. (Free Shipping, Next Day Delivery)
Reading the responses gave me another idea (I don't think any of the replies hit on it directly). Maybe the cops are interpreting his original post as a claim of child abuse; i.e. he's claiming he himself is abusing his children (he's trying to sell them after all). The cops have to investigate this hoax and therefore he's charged with falsely reporting an incident.
I'm not sure that this stands up though... If I come to you with hot dogs strapped to my chest and threaten to blow myself up. Then you - without my knowledge - call the cops, should I be charged?
New York Laws: Penal Code 240.50:
240.50 Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.
A person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the third
degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to
be false or baseless, he:
1. Initiates or circulates a false report or warning of an alleged
occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime, catastrophe or emergency
under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public alarm or
inconvenience will result; or
2. Reports, by word or action, to an official or quasi-official agency
or organization having the function of dealing with emergencies
involving danger to life or property, an alleged occurrence or impending
occurrence of a catastrophe or emergency which did not in fact occur or
does not in fact exist; or
3. Gratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency (a) the
alleged occurrence of an offense or incident which did not in fact
occur; or (b) an allegedly impending occurrence of an offense or
incident which in fact is not about to occur; or (c) false information
relating to an actual offense or incident or to the alleged implication
of some person therein; or
4. Reports, by word or action, an alleged occurrence or condition of
child abuse or maltreatment which did not in fact occur or exist to:
(a) the statewide central register of child abuse and maltreatment, as
defined in title six of article six of the social services law, or
(b) any person required to report cases of suspected child abuse or
maltreatment pursuant to subdivision one of section four hundred
thirteen of the social services law, knowing that the person is required
to report such cases, and with the intent that such an alleged
occurrence be reported to the statewide central register.
Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree is a class A
misdemeanor.
He is being charged with making the actual report, not for post claiming a sale of his children.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
In any case, turning someone in isn’t illegal. Not even turning yourself in, which is what he’d have been doing if he reported his own ad. The ad was illegal; reporting it was not.
Actually, if you are attempting to turn yourself in claiming facts which you know to be false, it is a crime in the State of New York. In fact, it's "Falsely Reporting an Incident in the Third Degree"... exactly what the man is being charged with.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
Attempting to turn yourself in is not likely to result in public harm or inconvenience. Posting a fake ad on Craigslist claiming that you’re selling your kids is likely to result in this, because it alarms people.
I challenge you to find any source that explicitly says either (a) he made the report or (b) he is being charged for making the report. All of them say “a report was made” and “he is being charged for falsely reporting an incident”. In fact, the officer explicitly stated why he was charged, if you go to the original source that reported on it: (and yes, the grammar of this is hideous, but at least it’s pretty unambiguous)
He was charged because he created public alarm by posting false information, namely that he wanted to sell his children.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
It created public alarm?
If he'd said that terrorists were about to set off a dirty nuke, a tsunami was imminent, or the martians had invaded you might have a point.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Charged with != guilty of.
That's why we have juries.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I found a link with real information and accurate details in the matter:
http://www.whec.com/news/stories/S1526702.shtml?cat=566
"The fact that I'm being charged for anything is so ridiculous, then the fact that they charged me with falsely reporting an incident. What incident did I report?"
"When he initiates an advertisement that causes an alarm or a public annoyance, that is according to New York State penal against the law," says State Trooper Mark O'Donnell. "Similar to someone yelling out fire in a restaurant where there is no fire."
So, their claim is that attempting to sell your children on craigslist is equivalent to yelling "fire" in a theater, as it would be a violation of more specifically New York Penal Code 240.50(1).
I don't expect the charges to be upheld, any good lawyer worth his salt should be able to point out that the statute does not by matter of semantics fit the actual circumstances.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
It's not like the children would sell.
sure, he'd get emails that said they were interested, but it's not like anyone's actually going to come over and pick them up.
first they'll play email tag, then finally say they'll show up on a certain day, not show up. after a bit of email tag, they'll make a new date, not show up.
So you go with the next peeps and they do the same thing. Pretty soon your just throwing whatever away because it's been a waste of your time.
Be seeing you...
Yes... that is what I’ve been saying all along.
The statute absolutely does fit the situation. The incident that he falsely reported was “I’m selling my kids” when he was, in fact, not selling his kids.
His Craigslist ad was “a false report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime”. The crime: selling his kids. The ad indicated that this crime was impending. This was false.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
I too would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7.
In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
More accurately, he did not give a "report or warning" of anything.
While I understand your relief in finally being understood, the idiocy of the authorities in this matter is the reason for the confusion. It's difficult for me to believe that they would have made this charge without him being the one to report his own ad.
While I'm certain that the person actually reporting the incident is indemnified from any criminal or civil actions by statute for reporting any child abuse, I'd like to see them at least try since such indemnification typically requires "good faith".
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
Santa Claus for sale, slightly used, mint condition, likes children and small pets. Still under extended warranty. Behaves grumpy with times.
Beard has to be maintained, has to be washed throughout. Get a red coat with a bit of grime at the bottom for free.
The bottomless bag is broken but should be fairly easy to repair with the right nelfs. Buy now!
(I've posted this ad on e-bay years ago; guess the police is a bit slow today...)
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
More accurately, he did not give a "report or warning" of anything.
Yes he did. His ad qualified as a report or warning.
It's difficult for me to believe that they would have made this charge without him being the one to report his own ad.
Start believing it.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
More accurately, he did not give a "report or warning" of anything.
Yes he did. His ad qualified as a report or warning.
No. He did not.
If I punch at someone, and he falls down, I do not make a "report or warning" that I did such an act. If this were actually staged, and the "punched" individual breaks a blood pack to appear as if he had had his nose broken/bloodied, would it qualify as a "false reporting"? No, it would not.
He neither reported, nor warned any one that he were selling his children... he performed his acts without warning or report.
If someone had actually in reality been attempting to sell their children on craigslist, would we claim that they reported, or provided warning of their criminal action? No. We would not.
If this stands, the chilling effect to our first amendment rights to free speech would be grossly unreasonable.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
If someone had actually in reality been attempting to sell their children on craigslist, would we claim that they reported, or provided warning of their criminal action? No. We would not.
If people saw the ad and ignored it, then yes, they had plenty of warning.
Did it look factual? Then it was a report. Did it imply that a crime would be committed? Then it was a warning.
If this stands, the chilling effect to our first amendment rights to free speech would be grossly unreasonable.
Methinks you’re grossly exaggerating the significance of this. You can’t go around saying that you are going to commit a crime; it worries people.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
If people saw the ad and ignored it, then yes, they had plenty of warning.
Did it look factual? Then it was a report. Did it imply that a crime would be committed? Then it was a warning.
It was not made as a warning, therefore not a warning. Crimes nearly universally require mens rea, or an intent to break the law. If he didn't intend this as a warning, this necessary condition fails.
It was not made to look factual, it stated explicitly that it was a joke: (paraphrased) "oh shut up liberals, this is a joke".
Methinks you’re grossly exaggerating the significance of this. You can’t go around saying that you are going to commit a crime; it worries people.
This individual was not saying that he was going to commit a crime. He was jokingly pretending to be committing a crime.
The police are just charging him, because they didn't like his joke... but guess what? That's not a good enough reason to charge someone.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
It was not made to look factual, it stated explicitly that it was a joke: (paraphrased) "oh shut up liberals, this is a joke".
There you have hit upon the one claim he has going in his favour. However, it is quite probable that people would miss that little bit at the very bottom of his ad... and enough people obviously took him seriously enough that the police got involved, and also took him seriously until they determined that it was a prank.
This individual was not saying that he was going to commit a crime. He was jokingly pretending to be committing a crime.
When the police get involved and take the matter seriously, it is enough reason to charge someone.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
When the police get involved and take the matter seriously, it is enough reason to charge someone.
No. It is not. If you believe it is, then you're part of the reason why we're losing rights in the nation.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
Some people get alarmed when a guy on the internet says he’s selling his kids. Is that really surprising?
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
If the police got involved because a threat of a crime was made that seemed legitimate enough to necessitate their involvement to investigate whether the threat was true, I should’ve said.
I’ve been a little hesitant to come down on this. What the guy was pretty clearly against the law, at least as it is stated and interpreted. Whether or not I agree with the law is something that I was trying to avoid; I basically tried to stick to simply explaining what he’s charged with, how the law is interpreted, and how the law fits the situation under the interpretation they make of the law.
But basically, I support the law. You can’t just have people threatening to commit crimes and thinking it’s all a big joke. It’s not funny, it frightens people, it wastes the police’s time, and it could divert their resources when they were critically needed elsewhere.
Is the enforcement of the law a little bit harsh in this case? Probably. But I could also see situations where it’s definitely warranted, and deciding what to do in marginal cases like this is better done in the courtroom, not in the legislature. My personal opinion? The guy was wrong to do what he did. Not felony wrong, but misdemeanor wrong. Give him a little fine, slap him on the wrist, and let him go, hopefully to be a little more prudent in the future.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
I simply have to disagree. While I understand that your interpretation of the law holds that this still fits the legal definition, my interpretation is one that the law simply fails to apply. Although you are most definitely correct, the best place to determine this is in court.
But it would be better for the DA to have enough common sense to look at the charge, look at the facts, and realize that he will be wasting government resources by charging this person for wasting government resources.
Seriously, this person is going to get a slap on the wrist, and any fine will likely be suspended so long as he does not violate another law in X amount of time.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
It is to anyone who knows what "alarm" means. I even supplied two examples of genuinely alarming things.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Ran out of mod points so;
Take your paranoid ranting somewhere else where 10 year olds gather perhaps? You would fit right in.
Please leave Slashdot for those who can behave like adults.
Spamming just makes you look like a fuckwad with an axe to grind.
Calling someone a libellous weasel and then posting as AC makes you look pathetic.
Leads me to think you are a malware author.
Happy now asshole?
2
Ah poor widdle AC, you really are paranoid eh?
I had never heard of "Clone" before your piss weak spamming.
Does your mate clone live in Australia? Hmmmm?
Check my posting history kindy boy.
Now for goodness sake grow up and try to act like an adult not a 10 year old.
You are as I said previously spamming a load of paranoid nonsense.
You should note that I have the courage to post logged in, something a pathetic coward like yourself does not do.
I am not going to waste my time replying to you again. But I will mod down any further posts of a similar nature I see.
Its hard to decide whether you are pathetic or amusing.
Trying hard, failing to land a blow again.
The more you lose the more abusive you get.
Thats how we can tell your just a 10 year old.
So I post a couple of lines you hammer away at another nonsensicla rant, hilarity ensues!
Oh and for your information email was unheard of outside of universities right up until the early 90's in australia.
So in effect there was no email. Hope that isnt too complicated for you kindy boy.
Ah yes hotmail got my IP, along with completely false registration info, thats gonna really hurt me!
At least you are managing to make slightly more sense than before. One can even decipher some of your sentences!
I could not care less what you believe. Any sensible person reading these posts will quickly see who is the incoherent ranting troll who posts caopy pastas, and who is giving calm measured responses.
I feel sorry for you really all that typing and you still have not even come close to making a point.
Still your anger is funny!