Slashdot Mirror


Kansas 'Swat' Perpetrator Is Now Also Wanted in Florida (kansas.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Florida police recount how close they were to aresting 25-year-old Tyler Barriss before his fake call to Kansas police led to a fatal shooting. "Panama City Beach police Lt. J.R. Talamantez told the Panama City News Herald that police had tied Barriss to about 30 other bomb threats," reports the Wichita Eagle -- a full month before another call led to the fatal shooting of a father of two in Kansas. But attempts to secure an arrest warrant may have been slowed by the lack of an address, since apparently Barriss "lived in a shelter in South Los Angeles. Police there found him in a local library."

A Florida newspaper reports that their local police department is now doing what they can to right the situation. "Lt. J.R. Talamantez, cyber crimes investigator with the Panama City Beach police, said the department currently has two felony warrants issued for Barris' arrest and is providing the U.S. Attorney's Office with information... Talamantez said the end goal is to identify all victims of Barriss' calls and bring him to justice on all those incidents... "We just want to send a message that this isn't going to end with a slap on the wrist. The victims will see an appropriate punishment."

87 comments

  1. Another day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Another Known Wolf.

    1. Re:Another day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Terrorists like you are why the world is shit.

    2. Re:Another day by ravenshrike · · Score: 2

      At least they had the excuse of the guy not having a known address, let alone having been called to the address in question 39 times.

  2. "The victims will see an appropriate punishment" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Maybe you could have phrased that better, chief.

  3. Re:"The victims will see an appropriate punishment by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 3

    All but one of the victims will see an appropriate punishment.

    --
    If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
  4. Punish by DCFusor · · Score: 2

    The caller, the shooter of an innocent person? It needn't be an either/or issue. I say, both!

    --
    Why guess when you can know? Measure!
    1. Re:Punish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      If public punishment serves to deter future events, then might as well only punish the swat shooter of an innocent person. They are the only ones that need to learn that killing unarmed people is bad. And also, if you punish the caller, NO FUTURE SWATTERS WILL CARE. That's right. They won't even be paying attention. It will not serve to deter them. They will keep doing it. Fix the system, not the users. Ignore troll users. Take away their phones and their anonymity (Require ID before taking someone's word, public key driver's licenses can get us one step closer. You need 911 services? You provide who you are.) You know, actual solutions.

    2. Re:Punish by q_e_t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I'm locked in the bathroom. My husband is battering tn the door, saying he will kill me".

      "Madam, can you quote your driving license number?"

      "No, it's in the living room, in my purse"

      "Sorry, Madam, we can't help you. Goodbye"

    3. Re:Punish by LWATCDR · · Score: 0, Troll

      They both have. The officer that made an error in a tense situation has lost his job. The swatter is I hope going to jail for a very long time.
      What I can not understand is how so many people are so anti-police. The officer was told that this was a hostage situation and that the caller had already killed his father. They where also told that hostages where all female. A guy walks out and then reaches for the waistband of his pants. The officer thought he was going for a gun and shot. Everyone seems to want a physic perfect police force where they know that the call is fake and can react without any fear or error.
      The swatter did it for money and the LOL and then bragged about it on a youtube channel.
      Let me help you out here. There is this thing called intent and it does matter.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    4. Re:Punish by LWATCDR · · Score: 0

      I love the idea that they want to take anonymity away while posting as an AC.
      I think we should ban AC posts from slashdot.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    5. Re:Punish by LWATCDR · · Score: 2

      Oh I am sure it will deter some.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Punish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      'Anti-police' and 'police should do better' are not the same thing. Quit conflating them.

      We really need to get rid of the whole 'reaching for their waistband' as an automatic excuse for the police to open fire. Too many actions can be interpreted / distorted as reaching for a waistband. Firing at the first motion seems to be based on the assumption that the person doing the reaching is some sort of movie-level quick draw artist - able to pull a gun out of their pants, aim and fire so fast that a police officer can't wait to at least see something that looks like a weapon. It's bollocks.

    7. Re:Punish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's dark. Lights are flashing everywhere. The person reaching into their pants is moving towards someone or something you can't see. He is ignoring all commands to stop moving and freeze. You, the cop, can't see his hand. He pulls something out and reaches down for what might by a kid. You can't see. What do you do? There's all kinds of ways for these scenarios to go wrong. Try being a cop for a while.

    8. Re:Punish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Could you pour it on a little thicker? "Might be a kid?" Come on, go all the way - it might be a button that'll start a thermonuclear war! Better shoot now, just in case.

      The police in this situation were in a distant, protected location - there was no reason to react in a panic, and they didn't have enough information to choose deadly force. But one of them, theoretically a trained individual who should have been prepared for this situation, opened fire when he should not have.

      I bet you've got excuses for the cops in the Arizona shooting too:
      https://www.washingtonpost.com...

    9. Re:Punish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too often, "he was reaching for his waistband" is just thrown out whenever they need a get-out-of-jail-free card. It just seems to be a rote response like "I feared for my life." Just words that are used when it's helpful. if you look at many of these cases, it seems like a reflexive response after the case. The other one that is sometimes used is "he reached for my gun" and you can see video of a cop outside of a car yelling "STOP GRABBING FOR MY GUN!" repeatedly at a guy inside a car with his hands up. It's on video and it can't be argued.

      The important issue of this swatting is the person who was killed was standing on a porch with lights shining in his face and he raised his hand to cover his eyes, as anyone would do, and that was "he was reaching for a gun." So the cops are at a distance behind cover and a guy covers his eyes and gets killed. Even if the cops were yelling at him, he is just a ordinary joe who is minding his own business and next thing, he is dead. He didn't sign up for that role but the cops signed up for their role.

    10. Re:Punish by Maritz · · Score: 1

      This happened in the US. Police there get to shoot whoever they like, more or less. Most of the time they don't even stop being cops.

      I agree the cop should be prosecuted, but it's not really a part of the world where that kind of thing happens.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    11. Re:Punish by Maritz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Everyone is assumed to be a threat until proven otherwise or rendered ineffective.

      Oh boy. Quoted for understatement. Yeah. Shoot shoot shoot.

      I say, walk a mile in the cops shoes before you start casting judgement.

      The cowardly cunt shot an unarmed man who had his hands up. Cops like him are cowardly, spineless fucks, and you've got waaaaaay too many just like him.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    12. Re:Punish by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Employ better police. Train them better. Have police who are not snivelling, jumpy cowards. Try that. See how you get on.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    13. Re:Punish by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Try being a cop for a while.

      Gladly. Despite your ridiculous excuse making, there is a simple fact at play. The cop shot an unarmed man. There were no weapons in the house.

      There. Are. No. Fucking. Excuses. For. That. I don't give a fuck if it was dark, or if the cop had been told some SCARY things.

      Pathetic.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  5. The victims will see an appropriate punishment." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The victims will see an appropriate punishment.

    Tough on crime!

  6. Appropriate punishment by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 4, Funny

    The victims will see an appropriate punishment.

    So he's going to be locked in a cell and SWAT teams will randomly terrorize him for years, day and night, without warning, at random hours?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:Appropriate punishment by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 0

      The victims will see an appropriate punishment.

      So he's going to be locked in a cell and SWAT teams will randomly terrorize him for years, day and night, without warning, at random hours?

      No, he's going to walk.

      He's not capable of understanding that he has done anything wrong. Any good lawyer will play that like a fiddle. He's a narcissistic psychopath or some other melange of serious mental disorders. No judge or jury will be able to hold him legally accountable for his actions.

      He'll maybe get a stay in a psych ward somewhere, and then be freed when the psychiatrists get bored with him.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:Appropriate punishment by geoskd · · Score: 4, Informative

      He'll maybe get a stay in a psych ward somewhere, and then be freed when the psychiatrists get bored with him.

      That's not the way that process works.

      The way it actually works, is the judge finds that a defendant is incapable of understanding the consequences of their actions, and orders that the defendant be held in an institution for such people (This is a process known as being involuntarily committed, and can be undertaken by a judge or a family member). If at such a time in the future, the person in question is planned for release from the facility in question, they are remanded back to the custody of the court, and the original proceedings are continued. This is not a get out of jail free card, unless you mistakenly think that involuntary commitment is anything other than a prison.

      Once a person has been committed, even the entity that committed them cannot get them released without the facilities consent or a court order to that effect.

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    3. Re:Appropriate punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Highly unlikely.

      Case in point: being a narcissistic psychopath douche didn't stop Shkreli from getting sentenced to 7 years in prison.

    4. Re:Appropriate punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After that douchebag was convicted last year, he showed up under YouTube's "live" channels. I was curious, so I clicked on his live stream. I mean, he was just found guilty a few hours earlier. What could he be doing?

      He was cockily telling his viewers that he would most likely not serve any time, maybe 3-6 months maximum if it didn't go his way. But he was confident he had studied cases like his. Then went to zipping around an Excel spreadsheet leaving people who have never used keyboard shortcuts in awe of his mad skills.

    5. Re:Appropriate punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


        No judge or jury will be able to hold him legally accountable for his actions.

      You may want to think a bit more on human nature. A jury will eat this kid alive. He called in a prank phone call, and someone died. That's not an innocent act, and he'll be completely hated by a jury. No jury is going to be sympathetic to a kid who's made these sort of dangerous acts many, many times.

      Trust me, this kid will fry.

    6. Re:Appropriate punishment by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      You do realize that being committed for being insane usually leads to a longer stay than if you'd actually been convicted of the crime, right?

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    7. Re:Appropriate punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

      Swat teams don't kill people, people kill people. Going by that philosophy, he is 100% guilty even if he only used his phone as a tool and the swat team as a tool to ultimately kill the people he was targeting.

    8. Re: Appropriate punishment by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Gulag FTW!

    9. Re:Appropriate punishment by Kjella · · Score: 2

      He's not capable of understanding that he has done anything wrong. Any good lawyer will play that like a fiddle. He's a narcissistic psychopath or some other melange of serious mental disorders. No judge or jury will be able to hold him legally accountable for his actions. He'll maybe get a stay in a psych ward somewhere, and then be freed when the psychiatrists get bored with him.

      Not very likely. The insanity defense is used for people with delusions, hallucinations, compulsions, psychotic episodes and such, that is to say people who lack the capacity to understand and/or control their actions. Not feeling bad about your crimes, poor impulse control or stalking/obsessive behavior is generally not enough for an insanity defense in the US, at least not after the 1984 Insanity Defense Reform Act. Besides it's more like a life sentence, the whole system is rigged against ever getting out because even if the professionals think you're fit for release it goes back to the DA who wants to be tough on crime, a court that'll mostly go along and a general public who isn't eager to have former mental patients with a history of criminal acts back on the streets.

      In other countries yes, like here in Norway if you're found not guilty by reasons of insanity you're per definition not a criminal and the justice system has no more say. So if they put you on medication and the medication works it's their call whether to release you. Re-offending statistics indicate they're generally cured, it's mostly people's feelings of justice that are hurt. If you suffer a heart attack while driving and run over some random, innocent pedestrians we kinda accept it's an ill body and not an act of terror. It's a lot harder to accept that the raving loon that went around stabbing people is the result of an ill mind, a sickness that has been cured and that the person is no more guilty of that than the one that suffered a heart attack. For a sane person it's hard to imagine "something else" taking control.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    10. Re:Appropriate punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since we can't be sure that someone is "cured" of a mental illness despite having treatment, the desire to keep supposedly "insane" people incarcerated is more about public safety since we don't know if they are going to re-offend.

    11. Re:Appropriate punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So he's going to be locked in a cell and SWAT teams will randomly terrorize him for years, day and night, without warning, at random hours?

      Sounds like you've never been to jail. Random crazy noises are pretty much a constant thing at all hours.

  7. Yet more rehashing of bullshit by civilwaradvocate · · Score: 0, Troll

    Trying to blame one kid for the intentionally hyper-violent law enforcement doctrine that pervades the country.

    Police are trained to be unjustly violent and blindly authoritarian.
    In other words, our police are almost completely militarized, from their training to their equipment.

    At any time you could become an "enemy combatant" in your own home, whether it be because of a systemic failure as in this case, or because of systemic manipulation. The chilling examples of the secret polices of inter- and post-war Europe come to mind.
    If you don't want a police state, you're going to have to figure out how to network with the people around you to make your voices heard.

    1. Re:Yet more rehashing of bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      oh, shut the fuck up. next time there's someone dealing drugs outside your house, what are you going to do about it? cry? no, you call the police. if someone calls in a bomb threat at a school, or if there's someone with a gun at the mall shooting, is nobody supposed to show up? get fucking real. this kid was abusing a means of calling for armed emergency last-line support. he was doing it knowingly to hurt and harass other people. he knew he was doing this and wasting tens of thousands of dollars of public funds. he should be hung or shot as an example that that's not tolerated. you can't allow people to do that kind of abuse to public systems without repercussions, or everyone who wants to will do the same.

      like honestly, are you stupid, or 10? don't be stupid. letting him get away with it is no different than letting the country decay into lawlessness.

    2. Re: Yet more rehashing of bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pussies call cops. Real men shoot using baited castle doctrine. Or IED claymores on remote.

    3. Re: Yet more rehashing of bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why not also punish a trigger happy cop? This isn't binary, both can be at fault.

      The doxxer is at fault, but to me, the cop should see way more jail time, he committed MURDER of an unarmed man. That deserves way more attention and jail time then somebody calling in fake bomb threats. Ones a hoax, the other is again, murder.

    4. Re: Yet more rehashing of bullshit by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      next time there's someone dealing drugs outside your house, what are you going to do about it?

      If your post is any indication, the answer is "Go outside and conduct all the fucking business you can."

    5. Re: Yet more rehashing of bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cop should see the electric chair to set an example for the rest.

    6. Re:Yet more rehashing of bullshit by fafalone · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      You disgusting authoritarian bootlickers who see no difference between a civil police force that protects its citizens and one that is ultra-violent, militarized, and views citizens as war-time combatants are a disgrace to the principles this country was founded on. Take your "but if police aren't ultra-aggressive soldiers that shoot first, ask questions, and view civil rights as something to work around, the only alternative is anarchy with no police" and fuck right off to PoliceOne you psychotic jackass. Same for whatever jackass who modded that comment up.

    7. Re:Yet more rehashing of bullshit by civilwaradvocate · · Score: 2

      Are you mentally retarded?

      There's a SLIGHT difference between 'some one showing up' and a military platoon crashing in without warning.
      No one is arguing for this kid's interest. You are willfully ignoring the real issue, you troll.

    8. Re: Yet more rehashing of bullshit by civilwaradvocate · · Score: 0

      why not also punish a trigger happy cop?

      Because cops are selected for their "average" (read: low) IQs and submission to authority?
      Because the problem isn't one cop's discretion, it's the training that ALL COPS receive?

    9. Re: Yet more rehashing of bullshit by civilwaradvocate · · Score: 1

      Seriously, cops do not do SHIT about drug dealing. I live in a downtown area and people sell hard drugs to partyers, junkies, etc. all day long OUTSIDE MY WINDOW and on the blocks all around

    10. Re:Yet more rehashing of bullshit by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Trying to blame one kid

      The SWATer is no kid: "25-year-old Tyler Barriss"

       

  8. Let me get this straight by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

    A police cyber crimes investigator is also the one doing the sentencing: "this isn't going to end with a slap on the wrist. The victims will see an appropriate punishment."?

  9. They need to fix the VoIP spoofing vulnerability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And this needs to be done nationwide. Unlike a lot of theoretical vulnerabilities demonstrated at the conferences, this is literally a matter of life and death. This kid isn't the only one out there pulling this kind of shit.

    And they need to train 911 operators to spot and react properly to out-of-state calls.

  10. Re: The victims will see an appropriate punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get this kid, stick him on a table, give him the chemicals he needs to depart this life then forcibly sterilize the parents.

    Problem solved.

  11. why aren't the actual murderers wanted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    someone should kill them

  12. Florida doesn't take action? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They seem to be showing a pattern of ignoring clear warning signs.
    They failed to take action prior to the recent school shooting and now we find out that they let 30 bomb threats go.
    I'm starting to think the whole big brother thing is just a scare tactic to reduce crime without doing anything except over-exaggerating their capabilities.
    How many other red-flags are they ignoring?

    1. Re:Florida doesn't take action? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      How many other red-flags are they ignoring?

      With regard to the recent tragic high-school shooting in Florida, the police ignored the biggest red flag of all: the Instagram photo of Ncolas Cruz in a MAGA hat.

      And yes, it's really him.

      https://goo.gl/images/Bsw9Hy

      https://www.snopes.com/fact-ch...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Florida doesn't take action? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, because everyone who voted for Trump is just itchin' to shoot up a school. Peaceful Buddha's left nut, do you even think about what you're saying before you post it?

  13. hey, one question for americunts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    how come when theres a shooting in one of your fucking schools the police never get in but when people are sleeping at home the swat team breaches thru the door like you were just watching some anime lolicon with extra patting on the head?

    i mean, really

    1. Re: hey, one question for americunts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This, and I'm from America: this shit has got to stop. Cops are running around acting lawless.

    2. Re: hey, one question for americunts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      They can shoot all the citizens for all I care. With nothing left but roving, terrified, sweaty, panicking, police.

  14. Has the SWAT cop been charged yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Glad, they're taking care of the idiot "just for lulz" guy. Hope they're going to charge the SWAT cop if they haven't already, too.

    1. Re:Has the SWAT cop been charged yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
  15. Re:They need to fix the VoIP spoofing vulnerabilit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If VoIP spoofing is done right (and it is, most of the time, by robocallers), there's no way to tell that it's out of state. It appears to come from a legitimate number in the local area. So there's no way the 911 operators can do anything other than react to what's apparently happening - unless the swatter is so dumb as to not be spoofing.

  16. Prison rape, but yes by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and personally I think it's a little screwed up that we use the prisoners themselves to inflict the cruel and unusual punishment that we don't have the stomach to do ourselves. Then again I'm not in favor of punishment based prison. Either rehabilitate him or keep him locked up for life if we think he'll be a danger to the community. But I'd like us to be good enough people that we don't have to resort to round about torture.

    Either that or go all in and use pain ray on them 24/7 until their heart fails. At least then we'd be admitting we want to cause pain and suffering.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Prison rape, but yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and personally I think it's a little screwed up that we use the prisoners themselves to inflict the cruel and unusual punishment that we don't have the stomach to do ourselves ...

      You want some guy that bounced bad checks to be taught, by the state, how to kill or terrorize people, then when he comes up for parole, turn him loose on the rest of us? Thanks.

    2. Re:Prison rape, but yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oops. never mind. I can't fucking read.

  17. Re: "The victims will see an appropriate punishmen by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    ...will see

    For the borderline illiterate, "will see" in this context is more likely to mean "will happen to them."

  18. Re:They need to fix the VoIP spoofing vulnerabilit by fafalone · · Score: 1

    Well you can't have 911 operators refuse to respond to a call because it originates out of state. For every one of these terrible pranks, there's people who call in because of legitimate emergencies with loved ones in other states.
    Caller ID, it's quite the redesign. There's too many legit uses to not allow spoofing at all; you'd have to somehow have every 911 center hooked into every phone company system to view the real origin, as well as into every VoIP provider (and with that, you'll only have IP and billing info at best, not geolocation). There's good reasons it's still a problem.

  19. Re: The victims will see an appropriate punishment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sort of sounds like his life is punishment enough.

  20. News for soft toys, stuff that animal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup. That's Slashdot.

  21. Re:They need to fix the VoIP spoofing vulnerabilit by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Well you can't have 911 operators refuse to respond to a call because it originates out of state.

    I'm curious: do they decide if the call is local because of the area code or because of some telemetry location data, like a cell tower's location? If it's area code, then that's just stupid. I've moved from one coast to the other in the past 3 years and I still have an area code from the midwest.

    If they use actual location data, then that's a little more reasonable, but I can still imagine a scenario where someone from outside the area would be making a 911 call. For example, if a mother is talking long-distance to her neo-nazi gamer son who tells her he's going to go shoot up a school because they're not real people, only crisis actors, then I would expect the mother to call 911 for the area where her son lives. I'm pretty sure the local 911 operator would put her right through. She might end up saving some lives, though hopefully not her son's.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  22. Re:Victims of what exactly? by q_e_t · · Score: 1

    And the police operations cost exactly nothing too. Er, hold on...

  23. Re: Tyler will learn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yay for state-sponsored rape and torture!

  24. Re:The victims will see an appropriate punishment. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those are not mutually exclusive.

  25. I say by kilodelta · · Score: 2

    The people doing the swatting are idiots. If you're gonna misuse an instrument of state use it to creative purpose. For example you could swat the more idiotic politicians in the region. That would be great fun too especially if someone could tap their in-house camera systems.

    Maybe then we'd get them to pass legislation ending the trusted CLID business.

  26. Both are guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both the swatter and the cop should face murder charges.

  27. Re:Tyler will learn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why did you capitalise 'negro'? It's not a proper noun. Are you stupid?

    Only kidding. Of course you're thick. You're a dopey cunt.

    And there isn't a 'negro' in the world who isn't better than you in every way. Including Robert Mugabe.

  28. Re: "The victims will see an appropriate punishmen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The victims will happen to them an appropriate punishment?

  29. Re: "The victims will see an appropriate punishme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe it's written in RPN?