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."

Comments

Another day

[Anonymous Coward]

Another Known Wolf.

Re:Another day

[ravenshrike]

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.

Re:"The victims will see an appropriate punishment

[I'm New Around Here]

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

Punish

[DCFusor]

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

Re:Punish

[q_e_t]

"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"

Re:Punish

[LWATCDR]

Oh I am sure it will deter some.

Re:Punish

[Anonymous Coward]

'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.

Re:Punish

[Anonymous Coward]

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...

Re:Punish

[Maritz]

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.

Appropriate punishment

[DontBeAMoran]

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?

Re:Appropriate punishment

[geoskd]

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.

Re:Appropriate punishment

[Kjella]

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.

Prison rape, but yes

[rsilvergun]

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.

Re:Yet more rehashing of bullshit

[civilwaradvocate]

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.

I say

[kilodelta]

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.