Accused Ottawa Cyberbully Facing 181 Charges Apologizes

Freshly Exhumed writes The day Robert James Campbell quit his job, he went home and started plotting revenge against everyone he felt had wronged him in life. He says he didn't leave his Ottawa apartment for seven months. The online campaign of harassment and hatred he's accused of launching spanned more than a decade. He is accused of creating fake online profiles to destroy reputations in short order, presenting his targets to the world as child predators, members of a Nazi party, exotic dancers and prostitutes. Police roused Campbell on the morning of July 31 and arrested him on 181 charges of criminal harassment, identity theft and defamatory libel. Campbell publicly apologized to his alleged victims and says he has instructed his lawyer to file a guilty plea.

Comments

so he's with the Media?

[Anonymous Coward]

sounds like the MO of any "reporter" these days, filling out the ideological biases of their employer.

Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Notice that they didn't have to invent any new charges for this just because it was on the Internet.
Current law covers all this sort of thing.

Re:Traditional crimes

[maliqua]

Canada's legal system is based on enforcing the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law which allows us a bit more flexibility for circumstances that were unanticipated when the laws were created.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Say what? Canada is common-law based, same as UK, US, Commonwealth nations etc. I guess what you mean is that the judges might look at intent more closely...

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

well considering the USA is a 'letter of the law' country your statement seems pretty inaccurate...

Re:Traditional crimes

[JMJimmy]

Common-law advises Canadian law, it does not dictate it. If anything the US has a greater obligation under treaty law though the courts often choose to ignore that part of the US constitution. maliqua was right, spirit of the law comes before common-law.

Also, this guy is NUTS for pleading guilty - the law is a complete violation of freedom of expression rights.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Russ1642]

Except for Quebec. They get their own backward legal system because French.

Re:Traditional crimes

[maliqua]

Say what? Canada is common-law based, same as UK, US, Commonwealth nations etc. I guess what you mean is that the judges might look at intent more closely...

I mean exactly what i said, common-law refers to a system of consistency basing decisions of how crimes are handled and how evidence is weighted against established president in previous similar cases, and is designed to ensure consistent and equal treatment of similar circumstances going forward.

Common-law systems can be enforced by following the letter of the law, or the spirit of the law. In the united states the letter is followed more rigidly than in Canada. Both systems have merit and both systems are common-law based (Yes i know the usa doesn't exclusively follow the letter of the law but its more rigid than here in Canada)

Re:Traditional crimes

[PmanAce]

Really? Care to backup your claim with some actual evidence? You should start by properly terminating your sentence to make it more readable.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Close but not quite.....

Spirit of the law for common people.
Letter of the law for corporations or the elite.

Example:

      Common guy finds a way to not break any laws but get something for free. He gets arrested anyways and charged with some catch-all law. tomorrow morning a new law is created to fill the loophole. (punishment + a new specific law). Why? Spirit of the prevents screwing your neighbors.

      Big corporation finds a way to screw people right to their face by carefully tip-toeing the laws. Since no law was broken they will not be charged (even with a catch-all law) and no new laws will be created overnight to prevent the behavior. Why? Letter of the law, nothing wrong was done even if a majority of people are harmed and pissed off feeling wronged.

      Common guy example #2: You find a new way to get high using a plant that naturally grows and isn't Cannabis. It's banned *pre-emptively* until they can "research" it's effects. (I'm talking about Salvia Divinorum, which was banned in the State of Illinois because spirit of the law says you can't get high no matter how safe. If you find a loophole a new law will be created overnight.)

See how it works? You and I cannot ever slip through the intent of the law, but corporations can screw us all to our face when it's obviously *wrong* but nothing ever gets done.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, doesn't his conduct fall under harassment, which is a legitimate offence?

Re:Traditional crimes

[gatfirls]

Free expression includes this?

Anonymously emailing false comments that a woman was having marital problems
Suggesting another woman had an abortion instead of a miscarriage
Creating a fake Facebook profile of a man whom he said was abused as a child
Falsely suggesting a man had committed crimes and that information was sent to relatives outside the country
Anonymously mailing false comments that a man supported the Nazi party and was a pedophile
Making false claims that a woman had produced pornography and engaged in bizarre sexual acts
Creating a false online profile suggesting a woman worked as an exotic dancer

Re:Traditional crimes

[adonoman]

See Watson vs. United States for an example of the letter of the law vs. the spirit of the law. This likely would have ended up completely differently in Canada.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Though true, corporations and the hyper rich do get different treatment this is clearly off topic and an entirely different discussion.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Massacrifice]

Backward, no. Different, yes. Some call it the best of both worlds - french inherited civil law is very precise, allowing clear and fair resolution of conflicts.

Quebec law is unique in Canada because Quebec is the only province in Canada to have a juridical legal system (pertaining to the administration of justice) under which civil matters are regulated by French-heritage civil law. Public law, criminal law and other federal law operate according to Canadian common law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q...

Re:Traditional crimes

[bsDaemon]

I think the term you are looking for is 'civil law', not 'letter of the law'. US legal system at the federal level is heavily influenced by common law, as it is in most states. States which cover areas originally colonized by France or Spain have a tradition of civil law.

https://www.law.berkeley.edu/l...
http://www.economist.com/blogs...

The history of common law in the US is why you'll hear in trial coverage or in shows like law & order, lawyers will use precedents when raising their objections or filing motions. This is usually called 'case law', as it is law which hasn't been written by the legislature, but which has come into common practice as a result of a judge interpreting a written law and setting a precedent. If subsequent judges agree to that ruling, eventually it because sort the way things are, until the Supreme Court weighs in, or the legislature spells it out (in a statute).

Re:Traditional crimes

[MightyMartian]

Canada, save Quebec, is common law. (As I recall, New Orleans also has a Continental-based civil code like Quebec, both being former colonies of France).

Re:Traditional crimes

[bsDaemon]

Yes, there is also strong civil law traditions in California and the Southwest US because of Spanish colonization, which I alluded to in my post.

Re:Traditional crimes

[wisnoskij]

I hear he can bully someone by whistling into a phone.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Louisiana (not just New Orleans) used to have that kind of civil code...I'm sure there are some old laws on the books that relate but for the most we fall in line with the rest of the US. It's a common misconception around here. Then again we're so corrupt it doesn't REALLY matter what legal system we use...if you piss the wrong person off you end up in jail for unsubstantiated charges. (see http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2014/09/lawsuit_claims_da_walter_reed.html)

Re:Traditional crimes

[geekoid]

No, it isn't.
Freedom of speech does not mean you have no repercussion for lying about people. It never has/

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not true. California law has basicallt no connection to civil law. Even Louisiana is a common law state, the influence of civil law doesn't go much farther than using a few words associated with Civil law.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Bardez]

You're on the internet. That sentence should be perfectly readable to you, because reasons.

Re:Traditional crimes

[bsDaemon]

I think the influence may have dissapated, but i had a real estate law professor once upon a time who was a member of the Bar in California and was adamant about the influence of civil law in the state.

Re:Traditional crimes

[bsDaemon]

I should say, that this had a lot of bearing on the status of California, the South West and Louisiana being Community Property states. Washington and Wisconsin and Idaho are as well. The status of most of these states as community property states is a direct result of a system inherited from Spanish rule.

Re:Traditional crimes

[HornWumpus]

The corruption sounds terrible. You should move. I hear Chicago is nice.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Educate yourself, because http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/11/english-has-a-new-preposition-because-internet/281601/

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

I hear he can bully someone by whistling into a phone.

brilliant but i fear to subtle for most

Re:Traditional crimes

[PmanAce]

Well seeing as how his statement indirectly involved me, I was expecting a little bit more than just reasons.

Re:Traditional crimes

[neoritter]

Can't believe I have to defend this...but...
2. Is a true statement. Abortion comes from the word abortio and aborior which both have the meaning of miscarriage. And "abortion" as people refer to in pro-choice arguments, etc is an induced abortion, i.e. an induced miscarriage.

Re:Traditional crimes

[xevioso]

Wow. I didn't realize linguists were actually embracing this. OK, cool. But it just seems shorthand for removing the word "of" or "of a" which accomplishes the same thing.

I was late to work because hangover = I was late to work because of a hangover.

Re:Traditional crimes

[ultranova]

2. Is a true statement. Abortion comes from the word abortio and aborior which both have the meaning of miscarriage. And "abortion" as people refer to in pro-choice arguments, etc is an induced abortion, i.e. an induced miscarriage.

And in modern English as commonly used "abortion" means a purposefully induced miscarriage, just like you yourself state above, while "miscarriage" means an unintended one. Etymology of words is fascinating, but it does not make a statement that is false by their current meaning any less so. And it definitely does not excuse someone who's purposefully trying to deceive.

Re:Traditional crimes

[JMJimmy]

No, it isn't.
Freedom of speech does not mean you have no repercussion for lying about people. It never has/

Canada doesn't have freedom of speech.

Re:Traditional crimes

[dissy]

Also, this guy is NUTS for pleading guilty - the law is a complete violation of freedom of expression rights.

So if I was to repetitively punch you in the face until caving your skull in, you are perfectly OK with that and me being allowed to do it?

After all, I am just flexing my freedom of expression rights by executing a public performance play. It's hardly my fault the plot results in your characters death :P

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Canadian Bill of Rights

S.C. 1960, c. 44

Assented to 1960-08-10

An Act for the Recognition and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
Preamble

The Parliament of Canada, affirming that the Canadian Nation is founded upon principles that acknowledge the supremacy of God, the dignity and worth of the human person and the position of the family in a society of free men and free institutions;

Affirming also that men and institutions remain free only when freedom is founded upon respect for moral and spiritual values and the rule of law;

And being desirous of enshrining these principles and the human rights and fundamental freedoms derived from them, in a Bill of Rights which shall reflect the respect of Parliament for its constitutional authority and which shall ensure the protection of these rights and freedoms in Canada:

Therefore Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:
PART IBILL OF RIGHTS
Marginal note:Recognition and declaration of rights and freedoms

1. It is hereby recognized and declared that in Canada there have existed and shall continue to exist without discrimination by reason of race, national origin, colour, religion or sex, the following human rights and fundamental freedoms, namely,

        (a) the right of the individual to life, liberty, security of the person and enjoyment of property, and the right not to be deprived thereof except by due process of law;

        (b) the right of the individual to equality before the law and the protection of the law;

        (c) freedom of religion;

        (d) freedom of speech;

        (e) freedom of assembly and association; and

        (f) freedom of the press.

Re:Traditional crimes

[JMJimmy]

Freedom of expression does include this as it relates to criminal law up to the point where hate speech is involved. Civil law covers slander / libel so making false claims is not without consequence, but it's not up to criminal judges/law to determine the "truth" of a statement or the "bullying" nature of a comment. Harassment is often misunderstood as limiting freedom of expression - but it doesn't limit expression specifically, rather a pattern of behaviour that could endanger the safety of another individual.

   

Re:Traditional crimes

[JMJimmy]

Freedom of expression is not unlimited. "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice." that trumps freedom of expression every time.

Re:Traditional crimes

[rtb61]

More simply put, freedom of speech is the right to freely express your opinion as just that and not the right to misrepresent lies as the truth. Apparently Ronny Raygun eliminated that distinction in the US http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F... his singular greatest achievement, if you are a lying psychopath corporate executive.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Smonson78]

For the small group of people who appreciated it... totally worth it.

Re:Traditional crimes

[dissy]

That is what I thought too, but you were pretty clear that harming other people doesn't come into play for Robert Campbell, so naturally I assumed harming others wouldn't come into play for me either.

Re:Traditional crimes

[JMJimmy]

Physical harm and emotional harm are not the same and you were just being hyperbolic.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

You think hate speech is not protected? Of course it is.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't believe I have to defend this...but...
2. Is a true statement. Abortion comes from the word abortio and aborior which both have the meaning of miscarriage.

If you find yourself disbelieving your actions, that's often a good sign that you shouldn't take them. Otherwise it may happen that other people will correctly refer to you as a 'bloody idiot' (*).

(*) 'bloody' = filled with blood. At least I suppose that you a living ordinary person instead of a bot. And incidentally, 'idiot' comes from ancient Greek where it meant, among other things, 'an ordinary person'.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like he is a preacher and is going to heaven, you unrepentant sinner.

This is clearly freedom of religion. Why are they infringing upon it?

Re:Traditional crimes

[tehcyder]

Physical harm and emotional harm are not the same

No they're not the same, but that does not mean that the latter doesn't exist.

Re:Traditional crimes

[JMJimmy]

Physical harm and emotional harm are not the same

No they're not the same, but that does not mean that the latter doesn't exist.

I never claimed it didn't exist - just that "bullying" laws violate rights while slander/libel laws are for false claim disputes between citizens where they belong. I'm not condoning the behaviour - I'm just saying that government has no place in criminalizing it.

Re:Traditional crimes

[JMJimmy]

You think hate speech is not protected? Of course it is.

Not in Canada. In the US most definitely it's protected. In Canada it's a crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:Traditional crimes

[JMJimmy]

LOL - that law was completely toothless/ineffective which is why this was enacted:

CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982 (80)
PART I
CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

  Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:
Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms
Marginal note:Rights and freedoms in Canada

1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Fundamental Freedoms
Marginal note:Fundamental freedoms

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

        (a) freedom of conscience and religion;

        (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

        (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

        (d) freedom of association.

Re:Traditional crimes

[tehcyder]

There is a difference between humourous internet shorthand and actual speech in the real world.

You can write "LOL :-)" on Twitter, but if you actually say "lol smiley face" out loud you sound like a developmentally challenged ten year old.

Re:Traditional crimes

[JMJimmy]

Harassment is only if the behaviour is targeted at an individual or identifiable grohup of individuals - not sure that was the case here (seems like the guy was just an asshole in general). It would also have to either be threatening in nature, physical in nature, or on one of the 11 grounds of discrimination.

Re:Traditional crimes

[Anonymous Coward]

it seems like GPs purpose was to expose a euphemism for what it is, in this case; there was apparently no chance for success, so the only question remaining was: on whose terms? yes, yes with your abstractions, maybe this was a medical emergency, etc; i don't know the circumstances and neither do you - which is really the foundation of the charges, right; GP suspects spin based on clumsy (ok, it's a pretty pedantic argument) use of the language - and we would be well served to assume that it is spin since we aren't privy to the facts

Dude needs help more than anything else.

[Anonymous Coward]

Harassment is one thing.

Quitting your job and going on a bizarre vindictive orgy of online retribution to get vengeance for your failed life is something else.

This dude blew a gasket after all the screws got loose and the marbles fell out.

Right.

[Reason58]

Oh, he's sorry alright. Sorry he got caught.

Remorse is possible for a bad decision made in the heat of the moment. This man, on the other hand, was deliberate and meticulous in his abuse of several people that lasted over a *decade*. These are not the actions of someone who made a mistake, these are the actions of a sociopath.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, he's sorry alright. Sorry he got caught.

Then why did he file a guilty plea?

Re:Right.

[maliqua]

because he knows he is guilty and likely will be found guilty, costing the crown less money to convict you provides some leniency

Re:Right.

[i kan reed]

So... let's say he's a sociopath.

That means the problem is one of mental health. An untreatable personality disorder, no less. How does that affect the correct course of action here?

Re:Right.

[jellomizer]

Well sometimes the courts are easier on a person if they admit to do what they did and apologize for it. Vs wasting the courts time trying to convince them that he did didn't do it, or was just in doing it.

 

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean only people who are truly, deep down inside, very sorry for their actions file a guilty plea? You'd never do it to strike a deal with the prosecutor to get a lesser sentence because the evidence they have on you is incontrovertible?

Wow, you've got a bizarre thought process you've got going on there...... Either that or your making a joke that went over my head.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

if he and or his lawyer truly believed he had a mental disability they would have plead that way and got experts to back it up. If you do that and your found to be mentally fit, then your perceived as being deceptive and calculating.. which really doesn't help any case or sentencing decisions. Simply owning up to it and not trying to waste everyones time can go a long way

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

accused bully apologizes profusely at gunpoint. another victory for the state!

Re:Right.

[luis_a_espinal]

So... let's say he's a sociopath.

That means the problem would be one of mental health.

There, fixed that for you (since we are starting from a hypothetical.)

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Remorse is possible for any bad decision, or any series of them made over any period of time. There's no magical threshold - of either time or severity - where remorse suddenly becomes impossible.

Maybe this guy is genuinely sorry, and maybe he's not. I don't know, and unless you personally know him, neither do you.

Re:Right.

[smooth wombat]

Or he's taking personal responsibility and accepting whatever awaits him because he knew what he did was wrong.

Unlike the guy who deliberately put his equipment in someone else's closet, attempted to hide that equipment, then whined when he was caught and tried to claim he was the victim before he killed himself.

Re:Right.

[i kan reed]

I am taking the preposition offered by the grandparent as an absolute truth, and trying to use deductive logic on it for useful implications.

I in no way am clinically analyzing this individual, and actually asserting the preposition.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd assume everyone probably agrees that he does have a mental disability (or problem) only, give a broad spectrum, it's likely not in the plea worthy range. My guess is that his sentence will include some type of therapy.

Re:Right.

[pla]

You'd never do it to strike a deal with the prosecutor to get a lesser sentence because the evidence they have on you is incontrovertible?

Entering a guilty plea differs from offering an unsolicited apology. Sure, I might pragmatically enter a guilty plea, but the idea of any sort of sincere apology after engaging in a decade long campaign of harassment? It just doesn't even make sense.

I don't know if Canada has a version of the "insanity" defense, and I know that very rarely works in the US, but I'd have to say that no sane person would waste that much time systematically trashing their former coworkers over a stupid job. That dude snapped - I'd call his coworkers lucky he didn't literally hunt them down one by one and torture them to death in his basement.

Re:Right.

[i kan reed]

Just an FYI, our system of law doesn't typically consider "sociopathic" cause for a plea of insanity, because they are in conscious control of your faculties, those faculties do not work normally to generate sensible and healthy behavior. Lack of empathy plus risk taking are a perfect formula for committing crime.

My theory: as socioeconomic factors have become increasingly limited as causes of crime, by our increased collective understanding and usage of sociology, the importance of sociopathic disorders, and their interactions with the legal system have become more important, and not properly addressed.

Re:Right.

[i kan reed]

As far as I've heard, severe personality disorders like anti-social personality disorder(i.e. sociopathy) do not have effective treatements, yet.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Contrary to popular belief, sociopathy is not a mental health disorder.

Re:Right.

[nblender]

i'm not defending his actions ... But I feel, in some small way, like I can put myself in his shoes. I was physically and emotionally tormented through 6 years of my early years at school. It had a profound effect on who I am today. I remember down to the detail every one of these incidents and I have vivid memories of the perpetrators.. Over the years I have imagined who these people must have grown up to be and delighted in the fact that they probably became menial laborers... I even had one of them in my house more than 20 years later to install my cable modem. I recognized him immediately and I don't think he had any idea who I was... I personally wouldn't wage a campaign of harrassment against these people but I know I would take secret delight if I were to read of their untimely deaths in the papers... Because of this, I can imagine how this guy felt...

As soon as we found out that my son was being bullied, we acted quickly to intervene and change the situation. I don't want my son to grow up having to deal with this sort of baggage.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Obligatory IANAL.

Being a sociopath impacts your ability to empathize with or consider another person's feelings over your own. But legally speaking to create a "mental defect" defense he would also have to not understand that what he was doing was wrong. Being a sociopath alone does not do this, you can be one and fully realize that you shouldn't run over a kid on purpose. That is what makes you guilty. Mens rea, or the guilty mind.

Now the problem for this guy would be that he would have to prove that he didn't understand that what he was dong was wrong for the entire course of his crime spree...10 years? That would be a tough hill to climb for any defense lawyer.

Re:Right.

[i kan reed]

The DSM designation is "Antisocial personality disorder", and yes it is. It's just one with no known physiological cause.

Re:Right.

[idontgno]

Maybe this guy is genuinely sorry, and maybe he's not. I don't know, and unless you personally know him, neither do you.

Given the limits of what anyone can ever really know of another person's intent and thoughts, arguably true. Nonetheless, the observed evidence is a pretty good indicator.

If he felt remorse at any point before incarceration, it wasn't sufficient to actually make him stop his bullying and harrassing. As such, it's not relevant as "remorse", unless you choose to cling to a particularly futile and ineffective definition of "remorse".

Re:Right.

[Reason58]

And it is a coincidence that after over a decade he suddenly comes to the realization that his actions were wrong the instant he was arrested? It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that it will reduce his virtually guaranteed sentence?

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

So you can't continue a pattern of bad choices for years and have sincere regret for the actions themselves later? If anything, you're the "sociopath" here. Go plead your case to a group of AA or NA members sometime...
 
Not saying this guy is sincere but your metric that you used to measure his actions isn't any more logical or better than his abusive behavior.
 
If nothing else it affirms my belief that Slashdotters use the term "sociopath" way too much. Why don't you just throw in a "draconian" and "order of magnitude" shout out there just for the heck of it all?

Re:Right.

[bobbied]

It's called a plea bargain. The state doesn't have to try him so they ask for less punishment than they could likely get at trial.

Re:Right.

[bobbied]

Shudap and put that blind fold back on... "Ready"..... "Aim".....

Re:Right.

[penguinoid]

Remorse is possible for a bad decision made in the heat of the moment. This man, on the other hand, was deliberate and meticulous in his abuse of several people that lasted over a *decade*.

People are routinely genuinely sorry for things they've spent decades doing (or more often than not, not doing). Do you think it's ever a good idea to waste a *decade* of your life plotting stupid revenge? There's so many better things you could do in 10 years, even if he didn't get caught it was a stupid waste of time.

Re:Right.

[ErichTheRed]

Agreed - I have no idea what it is about kids, but they can be the absolute worst to other kids. Maybe it's bad parenting or the lack of parenting, I don't know. Even looking slightly different from everyone else is seemingly an excuse for torment. When those bully kids grow up, I guess some of them don't magically grow out of it. I always figured most of them became cops or joined the military -- what better way to assert authority over people than having a mandate to do so? But i guess it's the parenting. If you don't have your mom or dad telling you from an early age that some things aren't acceptable, you grow up without limits. And since we're just a bunch of smart primates, instinct kicks in.

School sucked for me, kindergarten through 12th grade. Finally getting out of there and going to college was what basically turned my life around and prevented me from becoming this guy, or worse, tracking down the bullies and torturing them. The serial killer from the movie "Seven" comes to mind here...very creepy movie. Living well is the best revenge.

I've got two little kids now, and my son's almost 4. I can't do anything about other parents' shitty parenting skills, but you can believe my kids aren't going to be the bullies.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats why the DSM and ICD have two different criteria for "Antisocial personality disorder" right? Its not like its an overly broad subject such that the person has to undergo a battery of tests just to decide whether its a psychopathic or sociopathic disorder.

"Sociopathy" is a mental health disorder the same way "disease" encompasses everything from minor aliments to life-crippling viruses. Its a catch-all term based on the fact that psychology is a (relatively) unknown subject.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Still better than the other guy who killed himself rather than admit wrongdoing.

Re:Right.

[Livius]

Self-interest. Nothing more.

I doubt he even understands what remorse is, only that a guilty plea is a good strategy when there's very little hope of acquittal.

Re:Right.

[Jason Levine]

He said he was sorry only after he was caught and brought up on charges. This is basically "death bed confession sorry" where you do a bunch of bad things, say you're sorry at the end, and assume that you're now fine. My young kids try this all the time ("You hit your brother." "Sorry! Now give me another chance?") and it doesn't work for them. They have the excuse that they're kids (who tend to test the limits of acceptable behavior in an attempt to see what they can and can't do). He has no such excuse.

Re:Right.

[Jason Levine]

I get this feeling when you hear about those kids who were bullied until they snapped and went on a killing spree. I was tormented all through high school (before that too, but by a different group of people). One of the things they would do is arrive at my class before me and block the door to the classroom. They weren't in my class and they'd let everyone else through, but when I tried to get in, they'd close ranks so I couldn't get by as they hurled insults. One day, I literally saw red. And I'm not (mis)using "literally" in the "I don't mean 'literally' but I want to emphasize my point" sense. Everything turned a shade of red and I found myself focusing on the nearest of the bullies. Luckily, at that moment, my teacher arrived and broke up the bullies, thus letting me into the class.

That said, though I wished them ill fortune - I imagined going to our reunion to find their lives were miserable and mine was awesome - I never took any active revenge. (I didn't even go to my high school reunion as I realized just how little I cared about even seeing them. They just don't matter to me - even enough to hope they're doing poorly.)

Re:Right.

[Jason Levine]

If he spent 10 years doing this, had a mysterious change of heart, and apologized it would be one thing.

Spending 10 years doing this and apologizing once you've been arrested and are facing charges, though, is something entirely different.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, then the bullies won.

  The children that harmed you did so because their brains didn't quite have all the wiring finished. Prefrontal lobes just didn't have the necessary growth at that point to allow them to see consequences of their actions or to really feel much empathy. All children, while described as innocent can also be thought of from the other direction. They're assholes and borderline sociopaths. That includes you as a child. Yes, you.

Look, the reason that you remember those things over and over and so vividly is because that is the brain's response to dealing with trauma. It's well known in psychology circles. Basically, you have PTSD from...uh, being picked on by children. Here's the kicker though: That trauma is relived by you by your own choice. Every time that thought enters your mind you need to think of something else or do something else. You're at a point in your life where it should not bother you. But it still does?

The reason that I stated at the beginning that the bullies won is because you're largely no different from them. You laugh at some guy who picked on you in school because he has an OK job that he probably hates as much as you hate yours, (but pays less)? He needs to put food on the table for his family, provide them a roof and healthcare. You do realize that they were probably bullied as kids too, right? every kid is an asshole. remember that. You admit to not even feeling empathy if they were to pass away. Do you not think that there is something wrong with that? For Christ's sake, I was bullied as well. I still react to the news of someone I hadn't thought of in twenty years with a "holy shit" feeling. I'm sure as hell not ever going to look down on them in life or in death.

I'm going to point out that you're probably identifying with the guy because you have psychological issues of your own. Like narcissism or antisocial personality disorder. You should probably go get tested. Because as much as you care for your son I'm willing to bet that you're probably a bigger danger to him than any bully at school.

Re:Right.

[Mashiki]

That means the problem is one of mental health. An untreatable personality disorder, no less. How does that affect the correct course of action here?

Quite a bit actually, of course he'll have to pay for his own psychiatric evaluation to prove it. The government will only pay for it in some cases where the person is obviously a danger to themselves or others(such the killing of Tim McLean.) If however a recogonized individual(not a GP) states that he does have a psychiatric disorder, it can become a mitigating circumstance. This could lead to anyone of the following: Reduced sentence, confined to mental institution for the remainder of his life(basically as long as is required for treatment), and so on. It can also be a aggravating circumstance, such as he knew, family knew, and others knew he had a psychiatric disorder--was on meds, and stopped taking them. Which may lead him to be placed in short term psychiatric care, then moved to a regular prison. Most likely medium security.

Re:Right.

[ultranova]

Remorse is possible for a bad decision made in the heat of the moment. This man, on the other hand, was deliberate and meticulous in his abuse of several people that lasted over a *decade*. These are not the actions of someone who made a mistake, these are the actions of a sociopath.

We don't know that. The problem is that past decisions affect how you see the world. Admitting you made a bad decision has considerable emotional cost, which is why people try to avoid doing so. In the right circumstances this can lead to more bad decisions, and pretty soon the cost becomes unbearable. Nazi Germany is perhaps the most famous example, but this certainly can and does happen to individual people too.

Just because someone commits unspeakable atrocities does not mean they're a psychopath. They can be a perfectly ordinary person who simply gave the Devil their little finger and then lacked the strength to exit the ride. And it's important to understand how this mechanism works, because otherwise there's a temptation to think: "I'm not a psychopath, thus I could never do such things." Yes, you could, become a concentration camp guard or Unabomber II. It doesn't take psychopathy, it only takes willingness to indulge in the power of the Dark Side once.

Re:Right.

[plopez]

Hes so very very sorry:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Warning, there may be an advert

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

The DSM designation is "Antisocial personality disorder", and yes it is. It's just one with no known physiological cause.

There are known physiological causes http://host.madison.com/news/a-clue-to-why-some-adopted-children-can-be-anti/article_dfe8bbf7-cab7-59c9-ba99-243af7bc997a.html : low levels of the hormones vasopressin and oxytocin.

Neglect of young children was known to be able to cause the disorder and now they're beginning to get an idea of the physiological pathways.

Re:Right.

[tehcyder]

Ignoring the question of saving money, here in the UK courts generally take a guilty plea favourably into account for sentencing, as it shows some evidence of remorse and not spares witnesses the ordeal of reliving their experiences under hostile examination.

Re:Right.

[OurDailyFred]

Canada does have a definition of insanity, using the M'Naghten rule (sometimes referred to as the McNaughton rule) which has evolved into two principles, either of which defines an insane person as:

1. The accused did not understand the nature and quality of his act, or
2. The accused did understand the nature and quality of his act, but did not understand it was wrong.

In practice it is difficult for a defendant to successfully claim insanity unless it is upheld by serious medical evaluation.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting as AC as I am on the receiving end of such a campaign and my moniker gives me away.
There are lots of people doing systematic and organised harassment campaigns on the internet. Revenge for your divorce or for any other wrongdoing has never been easier - all you need is a few SEO skills and you can really make an impact.

I am aware of a group of 4-5 people doing exactly the same plus a lot more to a group of 500 people for the last three years. Three of the five are people with no grievance whatsoever (the other two had their partners walk out of an abusive relation in one case and simply because it was over in the other case) and those three are just in it for the thrill of hurting people.

Separately a lot of social workers are at the receiving end of systematic and long term internet harassment because they intervened in families.

There is a lot going on and it is getting worse.

Typical harassment campaigns last about three months and the people move on but there are quite a few where the cyber bully will not stop, ever.

True Scotsman found for cyberbullying

[Falos]

I've been considering the long list of artists that would laugh themselves wet over an intern reporting with "Xx_DubMaster93_xX just posted 'your just a fail poser go kill urself youre music sux' on the Youtube of your latest hit."

"That's adorable. I'm gonna send an autographed photo signed 'To my number one fan'."

This guy though, this Campbell passed name-calling about nine thousand miles back.

Re:True Scotsman found for cyberbullying

[Cabriel]

was it maybe nine-thousand and one miles back?

Re:True Scotsman found for cyberbullying

[Anonymous Coward]

Over nine thousand miles back? No, not possible.

Re:True Scotsman found for cyberbullying

[6Yankee]

Only five hundred, but he walked them...

only one way to deal with evil trolls

[swschrad]

lure them out of their cave as the sun rises

what a lazy jerk

[Thud457]

pheh! what a piker, you mean to tell me me didn't convert a bulldozer into an improvised tank, rampage across town and knock down city hall?![1]
Hell, he couldn't even bother enough to steal a tank.[2]


[1,2] Both of these things actually happened. And they weren't even in Florida. Look it up.

So?

[Charliemopps]

So what? Crazy people do crazy stuff... Get him some psychological help. I don't see this as something you should be put in prison for. There is very little that you can do online that I'd say is worthy of jail time. Maybe if you hacked a reactor or something...

Re:So?

[Cabriel]

Identity Theft is not worthy of jail time?

Re:So?

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Where exactly do you see identity theft there? They mention it as a charge but no example is given.

What about his "victims'" actions?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are his victims' actions completely ignored?!

I have seen people so low that I would understand if someone got down to this level of desperation.

Re: What about his "victims'" actions?

[TheCastro1689]

That's what I was thinking. They harassed him and get off without a worry. I figure because his accusations are hearsay and his actions are documented.

Re:What about his "victims'" actions?

[CurryCamel]

Because they always are.

Now, just now, we have caught a bully in the action. Please don't spoil the moment.

What he did - i.e. reversed the role from victim to bully makes him a hero for all who are bullied. But no less a bully.

How he did it was a bit over the top. But that is irrelevant, as bullies always are over the top. At least from the victims' viewpoint.

I sincerely hope both parties learned their lessons. But I also know half of his victims hadn't even realized they had gone too far. Just like he himself didn't notice. I don't envy the judge's task of determining what is "justice" here.

Re:What about his "victims'" actions?

[Anonymous Coward]

Realistically this case will go one of 2 ways (assuming this will become his first criminal conviction)

1. Make an example of him because of media hype around bullying. and he will do significant jail time
2. most of the charges will be dropped he'll be sentenced for 1 or 2 of the charges, given a suspended sentence or weekend jail, community service and court ordered counselling.

the sad thing is what will be more likely to determine the outcome of the case will be media coverage and attention it gets rather than facts presented.

Re: What about his "victims'" actions?

[Fwipp]

Yeah, if you call "12 years of ongoing harassment and gross slander" "without a worry."

Re: What about his "victims'" actions?

[ottcanon]

He was not harassed at all. Source: I worked at the same place with him for about six months before he quit. And I seriously doubt that the children he targeted harassed him. And I seriously doubt that there was some sort of conspiracy of 38 people from 3 different countries harassing him. He is simply looking for a way to mitigate his inevitable sentence. He would be happily harassing away if he hadn't been arrested. This guy deserves serious jail time. A convenient jail house realization that what he was doing was bad.

Re:What about his "victims'" actions?

[Tempest_2084]

Is there any evidence that his accusations have merit? I'm not sure I trust the word of a guy who is disturbed enough to do this sort of thing for over ten years. I don't think the article said anything about it.

Re: What about his "victims'" actions?

[Jason Levine]

My boys will often fight (as siblings do). They're not subtle, but one kid will sometimes do something that annoys the other. The second retaliates with a punch or a kick which I see. The second gets in trouble while the first might get off. I don't punish based on "he did X and that's why I hit him" because that's just an open license to have one kid punch the other kid and then make up a reason to get the other kid in trouble. I'll always tell the puncher/kicker, "if you came to me to let me know what he did, he would have gotten in trouble. Instead, by doing this, you're the one in trouble."

My hope is that my boys learn this lesson before they grow up. If they do, they'll be ahead of this guy (assuming he was harassed).

Re:What about his "victims'" actions?

[Anonymous Coward]

To be clear, not all of his victims harassed HIM in ANY way. I know one of them and she simply worked with him and never had any negative interactions with him.

Online libel can be quite harmful

[sirwired]

Poisoning Google searches for your targets can most certainly ruin lives, in many cases in an irrevocable fashion if the information gets republished far and wide. I don't see why prison time should not be on the table.

I've been through this

[Tempest_2084]

I'm a moderator on a popular forum and I've had something similar done to me by someone who thought I had wronged them (ironically I had nothing to do with what happened to him). Thankfully it only lasted a year or two and they did eventually get caught and stopped. But those two years were really stressful as I discovered that there really isn't much you can do without hard evidence. I can't imagine going through something like this for over 10 years. This guy needs some serious mental help and needs to make some sort of restitution to his victims. A simple "Sorry, I need help" isn't nearly enough. These days your online reputation can be your most important asset. Can you imagine if one of the people he did this to got turned down for a job because their name showed up on a child porn site or pro-Nazi group in a standard background check?

Re:I've been through this

[Anonymous Coward]

How can someone troll you online with no hard evidence?

Re:I've been through this

[Tempest_2084]

How do you prove that someone started creating accounts in your name or signing up your e-mail address to all kinds of nasty groups? Most sites won't disclose the IP address of the person who signed you up without some sort of legal order and I don't think "A guy left our forum in a huff and the next day I started getting signed up for stuff" is sufficient grounds to obtain one.

However in my case the guy also signed me up for magazines and some record clubs (back when those were still a thing) and that's how he finally got caught. He was dumb enough to mail one of the registration cards out without proper postage and it was returned to my address but had a postmark for his hometown (we knew who the guy was and where he lived). Interestingly the people at the magazine companies were much more helpful than the website operators.

None of this went through the legal system or anything like that since a postmark is hardly enough evidence for criminal charges, but several people confronted the guy with the evidence we had accumulated (I wasn't the only guy he was doing this to) and he agreed to stop.

Re:I've been through this

[ultranova]

These days your online reputation can be your most important asset. Can you imagine if one of the people he did this to got turned down for a job because their name showed up on a child porn site or pro-Nazi group in a standard background check?

Names aren't globally unique identifiers. So if having one like yours associated with questionable activity is enough to screw you, you're screwed.

Re:I've been through this

[drinkypoo]

A simple "Sorry, I need help" isn't nearly enough. These days your online reputation can be your most important asset. Can you imagine if one of the people he did this to got turned down for a job because their name showed up on a child porn site or pro-Nazi group in a standard background check?

I can, but that wouldn't be his fault — at least, not entirely. That would be at least as much the fault of whoever runs the background check system, and whoever uses it and trusts it. And meanwhile, at least some of the people he did this to did likely mistreat him, and at least some of the others will have been complicit in that mistreatment, if only by cooperating with it if not directly contributing in some fashion. That obviously doesn't make what he did right, but people rarely snap without being victimized.

I don't know what went down on the forum you moderate, but if you were moderating a forum in which someone was abused, then you were part of what happened to them. Responsibility, it's not something you can put aside as convenient. Sure, legally you can do so, but that doesn't really change the facts.

Re:I've been through this

[gnasher719]

How do you prove that someone started creating accounts in your name or signing up your e-mail address to all kinds of nasty groups? Most sites won't disclose the IP address of the person who signed you up without some sort of legal order and I don't think "A guy left our forum in a huff and the next day I started getting signed up for stuff" is sufficient grounds to obtain one.

Wouldn't something like "freedom of information act" allow you to access _all_ information that is stored about you? For example the IP addresses of all accounts _in your name_?

At least he didn't snap and kill them all!

[ErichTheRed]

Especially in the US, a lot of these kinds of incidents end with the person getting a gun, going back to the office and wiping out those that have wronged them.

It is interesting to see how much pent-up anger must have been in this guy's head to spend the amount of time and effort he did "getting his revenge." I don't have access to the case details, but that must have been a LOT of name-calling and jokes. If the guy really didn't leave his apartment for 7 months, that kind of sets a new record for obsessive behavior. I'm envisioning a whole bookshelf full of methodical notes about his tormentors.

It doesn't excuse what he did, but it's kind of sad when stuff that should have been left behind in high school persists in the "adult" world. But it goes to show you that the quiet guy you're making fun of might be taking careful notes and biding his time. His co-workers must not have been too busy if they had all the time to crack jokes at his expense.

Re:At least he didn't snap and kill them all!

[CrimsonAvenger]

Especially in the US, a lot of these kinds of incidents end with the person getting a gun, going back to the office and wiping out those that have wronged them.

I take it that these kinds of incident are vanishingly rare, then?

Or is it just that your definition of "a lot" is pretty much the same as "almost noone"?

Because, when all is said and done, the kind of shooting you describe is rare enough to make national news.

Which is not actually the same thing as "common"....

Re:At least he didn't snap and kill them all!

[Anonymous Coward]

Always defending your guns and your "rights" to shoot minorities, I see. Good job, redneck.

Re:At least he didn't snap and kill them all!

[Anonymous Coward]

Quote something the GP said that implied he wants to shoot anyone. You won't because you can't.

Is that how it works there?

[Anonymous Coward]

because he knows he is guilty and likely will be found guilty, costing the crown less money to convict you provides some leniency

Ah! See, here in the States, decent legal representation is a luxury. So, the prosecutors pile on charges - like EVERYONE gets charged with "resisting arrest" even if you kneel down with your hands behind your back and cuff yourself.

Because, the LESS legal shit you have to deal with, the less money you have to go into debt with and the less chance of going to jail with a public defender. A public defender is some lawyer who needs court room experience and wants you out of the way as fast as possible so he can go back to working on billable hours.

So, the less burdensome way for your average person to get through the criminal system is to play the game.

tl;dr, justice is for the rich.

P.S. And when you hear ANY prosecutor brag how they NEVER lost a case - like that shrill fat bitch on TV - they cherry pick. If you are a smart and rich criminal, you will get a away with it because the prosecutors are afraid of losing. And if they are stupid enough to try (like going after rich white kids), they get creamed - see, Duke Lacrosse players.

What about the "victims"??

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone is so quick to point the finger at this guy, but what about all the people that wronged him in the first place? Why do they all get a free pass? You can argue that what he did was worse than what they did to him in the first place, but that's horseshit. If someone attacks him first, he should be able to respond in a more severe manner.

I realize this guy actually does sound like he went way off the deep end, but since it wasn't him that initiated the harassment, there should not be an expectation that the retaliation be limited in severity to that of the initial offense.

Re:What about the "victims"??

[Livius]

No, his response should have been proportional.

Bullying is always cowardice, not retribution or even justice.

Re:What about the "victims"??

[Anonymous Coward]

He seriously harassed many people who never wronged him in any way. And harassed THE KIDS of some of those people.

Re:What about the "victims"??

[s0nicfreak]

Should he be able to bully them back? No, but if he is being punished for his bullying, they should be too. Unless two wrongs make a right now.

Re:What about the "victims"??

[Anonymous Coward]

If someone attacks him first, he should be able to respond in a more severe manner.

Where does that end, nuclear war? Hammurabi's "eye for an eye" is a an upper limit.

The most important question

[Anonymous Coward]

Which Slashdotters was he?

Accused Ottawa Cyberbully with 181 Charges ...

[grep -v '.*' *]

"I'm sorry," and then under his breath "... that I got caught."

Louder: "There, I said it. They can just file a Google 'Forget about me' form and then it's all better. Can I go home now?"

Shazbot!

[Anonymous Coward]

What does Robin Williams have to do with this? SHAME ON YOU!

Again the cops attack the victim

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead of arresting the criminals that ruined Robert Campbell's life, they are arresting the person thatspent years being beaten and belittled. The thugs in blue can relate to his tormentors better than they can relate to the average person so they beat and arrest victims instead of the criminals. Again here, the thugs in blue create their own criminal.

Re:Again the cops attack the victim

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a liar.

Re:Again the cops attack the victim

[tehcyder]

Projecting much?

ID Theft

[Anonymous Coward]

If he used his own name he would not of gotten caught!

An old saying

[Kevin Fishburne]

Freedom of speech, the law, yeah yeah. There's an old saying that I just made up: If you piss off enough people, you're going to get fucked up. Feel free to test and report on your findings. The nearest street corner is probably a good place to start. :)