Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Lands Drunk Driving Teen In Jail
Hugh Pickens writes "The Washington Post reports that 18-year-old Jacob Cox-Brown has been arrested after telling his Facebook network that he had hit a car while driving drunk, posting the message: 'Drivin drunk ... classsic ;) but to whoever's vehicle i hit i am sorry. :P' Two of Cox-Brown's friends saw the message and sent it along to two separate local police officers and after receiving the tip, police went to Cox-Brown's house and were able to match a vehicle there to one that had hit two others in the early hours of the morning. Police then charged the teen with two counts of failing to perform the duties of a driver. 'Astoria Police have an active social media presence,' says a press release from Astoria Police. 'It was a private Facebook message to one of our officers that got this case moving, though. When you post ... on Facebook, you have to figure that it is not going to stay private long.'"
This is the price you pay for being immature.
You know you have done something wrong (1.drive drunk 2.smash a car and the incident is the effect of a cause that is you alone, in wrongdoing). You look around, make sure noone sees you and when this turns out to be positive, you keep your fucking mouth shut. QED.
Treating this story as news in this day and age smacks of the "Same old crime.... but on a COMPUTER!!!" syndrome that we've been criticising for a decade or more.
Skating, smoking weed & playing video games is evil and dangerous, but
smoking cigarettes, owning guns & drinking and driving is cool, safe and "classic".
Freaking idiots!
If you get to know about a crime and do not report it, you automatically become an accomplice. He basically forced them to report him.
:wq
Idiotic for driving drunk. Even more so for admitting to doing something illegal, stupid and dangerous to self, and admitting it to people who apparently have an interest in the subject's well-being.
Do you see what I did there?
Do you wait until your friend kills someone before you do the right thing?
Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
Some poor guy's car get wrecked up by an asshole and you are only worried protecting the asshole from paying the consequences? Snitching is absolutely and completely ethical if you are reporting an immoral or unethical act. If an asshole has hurt another person, then you have a duty to snitch. The case where snitching is unethical is when you report a 'crime' that hurts nobody (drug use is a good example).
Exactly. He was just another stupid facepalmer and got exactly what he deserved.
Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
Yes. A better headline would be "Stupidity Lands Drunk Driving Teen in Jail".
Besides which, "friends" means something completely different on Facebook.
In the real world, they're people that would slap you in the face for being a dangerous shithead. On facebook, they're often just people that were in the same yearbook as you, once upon a time.
They're doing him a favour - if he stops drink driving, he's much less likely to end up in a body bag, or worse, maimed or in jail.
For me, my "obligations" to friends and family would stop depending on the nature of the crime. For example, if a friend or family member was committing a "victimless crime" such as taking illegal drugs, I would absolutely feel no need to report this. But for something like drink driving, you can be certain I'd reporting this.
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
Are these real friends or Facebook "friends"?
Excellent point. The English language needs a new term to differentiate between "real" friends and "Facebook" friends. Something like "f-friends", "eff-friends" or "fuh-riends".
The Forum is open for suggestions. But please, no terms including the word "cyber". That term is way overloaded.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
You! Out of the gene pool! The little shit could've killed someone, and you're worried that someone told on him?
is never a good idea.
I'm reminded of the Belgian who had a video of himself doing 300km/h on the motorway posted to youtube.
He was driving an Aston Marting Vantage Carbon Black edition of which only three were sold in Belgium. Didn't take the police long to figure out which one it was.
If you get to know about a crime and do not report it, you automatically become an accomplice. He basically forced them to report him.
An accomplice is present at the crime. You'd become an accessory.
Or even worse, hurting or killing someone else.
He was basically being ratted out by his own "friends". If you brag about something illegal, be sure you can trust the people you brag too. Has been like that for ages, nothing new with Facebook.
Even if my friends kill someone, I'll still support them.
That's what true friendship is about.
Being drunk behind the wheel of a car is a dangerous thing to be doing. If it was my friend i'd be dobbing them in too, for their safety and the safety of my other friends (and family, and strangers). I would be giving them the chance to turn themselves in first, but they'd need to be quick. That's the sort of support they need, even if it isn't what they want.
In any case, a true friend wouldn't put me in the position where I had to make such a choice.
1. Tell people about a crime you committed.
2. Get caught.
Glad that still works.
If your friends kill someone and it isn't in the course of defending themselves or their loved ones, then they are a bad person and so are you for supporting them. Friendship sometimes requires tough love and contrary to popular belief, is rarely something that lasts forever. If you don't know when to say enough is enough and let them go, then you're not your own person.
Real freinds prevent that from happening. Even at the cost of the friendship.
Very few people can handel the emotioal cost of killing someone even in a genuine accedent. And in the case of drink driving there is a good chance that the person killed is at least another friend.
The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
As far as I can tell this is not actually true, at least not in the US. IANAL, but the people here seem to be. As long as you're not in any way an accessory before or after the fact, as long as you remain silent and don't misrepresent or obstruct the course of justice by lying about not seeing anything when you did and as long as the victim isn't in your custody like being the parent or guardian and you don't have a professional relationship like a teacher, doctor or psychologist who has extra legal obligations then there's no general legal requirement to report crime. Even the crime of misprision require you to conceal the crime, not mere failing to report it. If you're just a completely unrelated bystander, you can do nothing. Cheering them on would make you an accessory, though.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
We [Humans] are not good at killing each other despite popular opinion. Having serveral friends that were involed in fatal accidents [not them of course] that where not their fault and they were cleared of fault promtly by the police. I assure you the for vast majority of us it *does* matter if someone you don't know dies. It matters a great deal.
Added to that in this case, is that for a drunk driver he/she is most likely going to kill someone they know, someone you know.
The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
1. If something is private DON'T POST IT TO FACEBOOK
If you get to know about a crime and do not report it, you automatically become an accomplice. He basically forced them to report him.
An accomplice is present at the crime. You'd become an accessory.
Actually, in most cases, you would be neither. In the USA, there is generally no legal obligation to report a crime. There are mandatory reporting requirements for some crimes by people in certain positions. For instance, teachers, doctors, and nurses are all required to report incidents of suspected child abuse.
This. Next time he hits a car there might be somebody in it.
And there *will* be a next time if you approve of his behavior by inaction (ie. not "snitching").
Exactly. His friends reporting him ARE being his friends. Hopefully, this is a wake-up call that, if he wizens up to, will keep his future from being filled with regret and manslaughter charges. If he doesn't, his irresponsibility will wreck more than just his own selfish existence.
Then pay for their legal defense.
Guess it disagrees with the US Court's interpretation too (http://scholar.google.com.my/scholar_case?case=14806734468103617188&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr&sa=X&ei=qzjoUMy1I8njrAePoIDoAw&ved=0CC0QgAMoADAA ).
So I guess the conceal is considered an active thing and not passive.
And as a result, these cultures tend to pretty violent and horrible places to live - after all, they still need to settle disputes and keep the members in line. The Mafia is a good example. So are honour killings. Stoning rape victims to death is also a great manifestation of these noble, straight-backed cultures, where justice is whatever the guy with the biggest gang of thugs says it is.
The rule of law is a good thing, even if every law is not good, because the only alternative is tyranny. And the laws against drunk driving happen to be amongst the good ones.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Drunk driving should come with an attempted murder charge, as that's what it is. I completely fail to understand US laws where they allow such an asshole to drive, even just "from home to work". Quite a few people around here lobby for a lifetime driving ban -- I disagree with them about length (if you were an idiot in your 20s, you may have learned in your 40s), but I'm all for such a ban being strict.
I think that's a dangerous idea. This belongs more under reckless endangerment laws. Repeated offenders are certainly candidates for lifetime bans, as anyone caught once really should become so paranoid afterwards that they'll not touch a drop if they know they'll be driving. It also depends on severity, i.e. how far over the limit they were, and other charges could cover injuries and property damage that happened as a result of their drunk driving. Being the equivalent of one beer over the limit, and not hitting anyone isn't the same as some crazy fuck who necks a bottle of vodka and goes for a drunken spin up the wrong way of a motorway. The latter would definitely seem a good candidate for a lifetime ban.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
In the real world, they're people that would slap you in the face for being a dangerous shithead
Actually, I'm constantly amazed at how many people will just sit back, mute, and allow their "friends" to wander off on some self-destructive path.
I've found that most people are more concerned with the friendship than with the friend.