Gamers Involved In Fatal Wichita 'Swatting' Indicted On Federal Charges (kansas.com)

bricko shares a report from Kansas: A federal grand jury has indicted the man accused in Wichita's fatal swatting as well as the two gamers involved in the video game dispute that prompted the false emergency call. The 29-page indictment was unsealed Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas. It charges 25-year-old Tyler Barriss, who is facing state court charges including involuntary manslaughter, with false information and hoaxes, cyberstalking, threatening to kill another or damage property by fire, interstate threats, conspiracy and several counts of wire fraud, according to federal court records. One of the gamers -- 18-year-old Casey S. Viner of North College Hill, Ohio -- is charged with several counts of wire fraud, conspiracy, obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice. The other gamer -- 19-year-old Shane M. Gaskill of Wichita -- is charged with several counts of obstruction of justice, wire fraud and conspiracy to obstruct justice.
UPDATE (5/26/18): Both Barriss and Viner are now facing life in prison.

Comments

It's an interesting admission

[Weaselmancer]

The charge is involuntary manslaughter.

From that link:

Three elements must be satisfied in order for someone to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter: Someone was killed as a result of the defendant's actions. The act either was inherently dangerous to others or done with reckless disregard for human life. The defendant knew or should have known his or her conduct was a threat to the lives of others.

The interesting bit is "The act either was inherently dangerous to others or done with reckless disregard for human life."

We're admitting that simply having the cops show up is so inherently dangerous that it constitutes a reckless disregard for human life.

Re:Good, throw the book at them!

[JMJimmy]

This could actually be a monumental case if the right legal team gets involved.

There is no denying their actions were wrong, however, there's a major question as to whether the police were criminally negligent by failing to properly assess the situation prior to storming the building. A reasonable person would expect they would verify claims before acting on them.

Re:What about the cop?

[houghi]

So if I would kill my father, hold my mother and siblings hostage and soak the house in gasoline, but then call the cops they would not shoot me?
As a European this is so wrong on so many levels.

I live in Brussels. We had a fucking terrorist attack at the airport. People where killed. At one moment the knew where they where and arrested them. They did not go in and killed everybody. These where known terrorists and they STILL did not just shoot them.

Yes, it might have been dangerous to go in. Yes, that could have meant that 3 people might have been killed. It STILL is no excuse to go all gun ho and start shooting. It was clear they had not all the information.

And if he wanted to kill his mother and kids, he would have done that already IF the information was correct.

Damn and fuck.
A huge part of the problem is that you (and many others) are ok with the fact that the police shot somebody. "Hey, not their fault." Well, it WAS their fault. They are not a tool, like a gun. You can not say, "The police does not kill people, people kill people." They are aware that people will lie to bring others into throuble. And it is even a bigger issue if they don't.

It reminds me of that video where some Swedish policemen in the NY tube held a person instead of beating him to pulp. And yes, criminals have guns in the rest of the world. It still does not mean that shooting is in any way the first option. It is the last option. The very last option. You stand outside and ask what is going on. And even when you go in, you STILL do not start shooting. This is not a video game. There is no respawn. "I had no other choice" is not good enough.

There are a multitude of things they could have done differently even if the information would have been correct.
The fact that "he was a dead man walking" is an issue. He should not be looked at it in that way.

Re:Good, throw the book at them!

[omnichad]

And in this case, the victims were bystanders. Try again.