Prank may lead to years in prison

[ichy]

A felony charge is over the top. Let him plead out to a misdemeanor and sentence him to a fine and some unpleasant community service.

 

[dabuddha]

When I was a sophomore some of the seniors ran a blow up doll and and an empty bottle of Jack Daniels up the flagpole. It was hilarious.


Someone outta run that prosecutor up the flagpole.

OMG hate crime!

 

[Scarpozzi]

The judge should just drop the case and the school should pick up the tab for the bomb squad visit. They're way too picky these days in schools.

 

[Perknose]

They jail this guy, but don't prosecute the Lower Merion School District of PA for spying and possible child porn because "there was no criminal intent". Disgusting.

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/06/08/2037215/School-District-Hit-With-New-Mac-Spying-Lawsuit

Lower Merion did have an arguably legitimate reason for putting the spyware that monitored use by taking screenshots on their expensive, only to be used for schoolwork laptops, even if you disagree and notwithstanding that they may have overreached in their use of them.

There WAS NO criminal intent, and they did pay hefty civil fines. It's in your own short article:

Lower Merion agreed to pay Blake Robbins $175,000 and cover $425,000 in court costs.

^^^^ For the little darling's severe emo distress at the evidence of where HE went on the damn web!

'Plaintiff opted to view the recovered images, and was shocked, humiliated and severely emotionally distressed at what he saw,'

Tyell the faux terrorist had NO LEGITIMATE REASON for what he did, and should suffer appropriate consequences (not a jail sentence, which he won't get anyway!

 

[Thump553]

The judge should just drop the case and the school should pick up the tab for the bomb squad visit. They're way too picky these days in schools.

Why should the taxpayers have to pay for the expense caused by this person's deliberate actions? he should be held responsible for the consequences, not us.

Overcharging is an ancient and well established practice in the justice system. The chances of this fool ever being convicted of a felony are slim to none-ditto with the chances of him actually paying the costs of what he did. Odds are he'll get put into some kind of suspended sentence program where the charge is wiped out if he keeps his nose clean for a year, and he'll have to spend a few hours in community service (probably something rough like reshelving books in an air conditioned library).

Perhaps it's perspective-many of you are close in age to this fool and don't know much about the legal system-but your coddling of him as a victim is just wrong.

 

[Perknose]

The judge should just drop the case and the school should pick up the tab for the bomb squad visit. They're way too picky these days in schools.

Why should the taxpayers PAY for this idiot's escapade?

He should suffer appropriate consequences, which should include restitution of the true cost of this incident (which I don't believe was fully $8,000.)

He won't be sentenced to any jail time. You do REALIZE that, don't you?

 

[Keeper]

With school shootings, something like this is taken serious.

You have to be pretty fucking stupid to think mimicing something the clearly resembles placing a bomb on school property is NOT an issue.

American parents have turned their backs on their children. Said children run wild and parents then scream how the school needs to properly protect other children - this is what is now happening.

Yes, it's a prank, but it VERY clearly and closely resembles an actual attack. Throw the book at this asshole. I was under the impression every one clearly knows to avoid anything that resembles Columbian or terrorists like behavior and actions.

For fuck's sake - gloves and a hoodie?!?

This....:thumbsup:
Back in the DAY I was taught you CAN'T yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater. This SHEET-TARD mimicked a potential life threatening act.
One that we, the American public, have gone through too often.

AMF... Adious Mother F_____er....

Today, I watch self absorbed fucktards talking about their feeble life on cell phones while driving a 5000 pound rocket down the highway.
I ride a motorcycle and these people SCARE the crap out of me.
Do you know Cell Phones, now cause more accidents than drunk driving?
Yes, we can sit here and debate more of the population drives and texts or chats than drink and drive so therefore...
Statistic manipulation 101. I get that.
My point is driving is a skill that needs your attention. Its not like breathing....
Its against the law where I live and I applaud officers that give these tickets. Applaud them.
It should be common sense NOT to. But we are too far self absorbed to think that way. Just like "Let me be Mr Faux Terrorist Guy".

Nope, sorry Mr. Bomber Prankster guy.
You wanted to be the "Man" and such... Odds are, he had a buddy recording you for You Tube.
Allow me to say... Welcome to making new friends downtown. Don't drop the soap.

 

[nobodyknows]

The rest is more than appropriate. $8,000 sounds high, but he should have to work to pay off the costs of his "prank", especially since the little darling still thinks he didn't do anything wrong.

That made me laugh.

 

[Powermoloch]

It's better to leave a blow up doll vs an unmarked box

 

[WHAMPOM]

Rushville teen facing felony charges over prank



Just let the kid go. Don't ruin his life over something as silly as this. Overreact much?

Sneaking in an inflated sex doll would have been an obvious prank, a box is a suspicious object.

 

[Fern]

I don't see a single thing illegal about the kid's actions.

Is it illegal to wear a hoodie?

Is it illegal to wear latex gloves?

Is it illegal to have a blow up doll?

Is it illegal to put a blow up doll in a restroom?

IMO, they should get off his back. If I was his parent and they didn't drop this sh!t asap I'd sue THEM.

Edit: Seems to me whoever saw the kid on the security camera could have easily found him and asked him wtf he was doing before going into DEFCON 1 mode.

Fern

 

[Zebo]

Indeed Fern where is crime?

I thought " what she was wearing" went out of style in the 1960s...guess it's back

 

[ShawnD1]

Why should the taxpayers have to pay for the expense caused by this person's deliberate actions? he should be held responsible for the consequences, not us.

Hmmm ok. So if I keep a ziplock bag full of sugar at my desk to put in my coffee (I do) and one of my coworkers calls 911 because he or she thinks it's anthrax, it's MY fault they called 911 and I should be the one who pays for the bomb squad to blow up my bag of sugar?

Well I'm glad we cleared that up. Welcome to Amerikkkaaa

 

[shira]

Was the inflatable doll above the age of consent?

 

[NoStateofMind]

Absolutely NOT!

Why not? Fern put it best:

I don't see a single thing illegal about the kid's actions.

Is it illegal to wear a hoodie?

Is it illegal to wear latex gloves?

Is it illegal to have a blow up doll?

Is it illegal to put a blow up doll in a restroom?

IMO, they should get off his back. If I was his parents and they didn't drop this sh!t asap I'd sue THEM.

Edit: Seems to me whoever saw the kid on the security camera could have easily found him and asked him wtf he was doing before going into DEFCON 1 mode.

Fern

He will not be sentenced to any actual jail time. Care to bet on that? His life won't be ruined. PC, I think you are overreacting.

You wouldn't happen to have a gambling problem would you? Want to bet an awful lot when differences of opinion are being debated. But no, I only bet on sure things and him doing jail time is not a sure thing (other than the time he is spending right now). If he is found guilty of committing a crime then he should be able to plea to a misdemeanor with fines/community service. If however they find him guilty on felony charges his life would be ruined and I don't think you would argue against that.

Hmmm ok. So if I keep a ziplock bag full of sugar at my desk to put in my coffee (I do) and one of my coworkers calls 911 because he or she thinks it's anthrax, it's MY fault they called 911 and I should be the one who pays for the bomb squad to blow up my bag of sugar?

Well I'm glad we cleared that up. Welcome to Amerikkkaaa

LOL :thumbsup:

 

[theeedude]

And we are laughing at the UK for having a "police state" ...

 

[M0RPH]

I'm also wondering what exactly the crime is here. Can anyone tell me specifically what the charges are going to be?

 

[Fern]

I'm also wondering what exactly the crime is here. Can anyone tell me specifically what the charges are going to be?

Felony criminal mischief (IIRC). I could see it if he had a fake bomb and and/or admitted he was trying to make them think he was planting a bomb. But this?

Fern

 

[SandEagle]

they had cameras in the girls' restroom?

 

[Capt Caveman]

Felony criminal mischief (IIRC). I could see it if he had a fake bomb and and/or admitted he was trying to make them think he was planting a bomb. But this?

Fern

As a school/police/fire official, watching someone in a hooded sweatshirt wearing latex gloves placing a concealed package in a public restroom should not be considered suspicious? No need to evacuate the school and call the police/fire/bomb squad, just go right in and open it up to see what it is?

 

[Perknose]

Why not? Fern put it best:

Originally Posted by Fern
I don't see a single thing illegal about the kid's actions.

Is it illegal to wear a hoodie?

Is it illegal to wear latex gloves?

Is it illegal to have a blow up doll?

Is it illegal to put a blow up doll in a restroom?

IMO, they should get off his back. If I was his parents and they didn't drop this sh!t asap I'd sue THEM.

Edit: Seems to me whoever saw the kid on the security camera could have easily found him and asked him wtf he was doing before going into DEFCON 1 mode.

Fern

Horseshit. Fern seems to think that high schools fucking well have real time surveillance eyes on their security cameras. That's laugably clueless and wrong.

INTENTIONALLY not allowing a clear shot of his face meant that the authorities had no way of knowing who that kid was or WHAT he placed in that bathroom.

Can you imagine if they hadn't acted on this and kids had died from a bomb?

Grow the fuck up and smell the reality of the situation. What that kid did was costly, disruptive, and over the line. Why you and Fern refuse to see and admit this I don't know.

You wouldn't happen to have a gambling problem would you? Want to bet an awful lot when differences of opinion are being debated. But no, I only bet on sure things and him doing jail time is not a sure thing (other than the time he is spending right now). If he is found guilty of breaking a crime then he should be able to plea to a misdemeanor with fines/community service. If however they find him guilty on felony charges his life would be ruined and I don't think you would argue against that.

Gambling problem? I'm not even a gambling man. I only offer to bet when I KNOW I'll win. I've never lost, and I've made $600 pure profit off of the adamant stupidity of posters like you.

So take your try at a personal attack and shove it.

YOU are the one who posted this title: Prank may lead to years in prison.

It's hysterically misleading. Anyone with a grain of sense knows he won't get any jail time. Your title is a troll. I smoke out hysterical trolls by challenging them to put their troll money where their troll mouths are. That's the extent of my "gambling."

I'm here to repeat this: He will NOT be sentenced to any jail time. You should know this, but you pretend not to.

Your "ifs" are tendentious bullshit, not to be taken seriously, and your endorsement of Fern's terminally dense "missing the forest for the trees" compilation, one big WHOOSH if there ever was one and so far from having "said it best" it isn't even funny -- means you are not worth arguing with any further.

 

[Doppel]

Obviously he won't spend years in prison, just because he "could", no judge will give him that.

 

[Greenman]

this is what we asked for.

This is exactly right. Though I think we demanded it.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Why not? Fern put it best:
Horseshit. Fern seems to think that high schools fucking well have real time surveillance eyes on their security cameras. That's laugably clueless and wrong.

INTENTIONALLY not allowing a clear shot of his face meant that the authorities had no way of knowing who that kid was or WHAT he placed in that bathroom.

Can you imagine if they hadn't acted on this and kids had died from a bomb?

Grow the fuck up and smell the reality of the situation. What that kid did was costly, disruptive, and over the line. Why you and Fern refuse to see and admit this I don't know.




Gambling problem? I'm not even a gambling man. I only offer to bet when I KNOW I'll win. I've never lost, and I've made $600 pure profit off of the adamant stupidity of posters like you.

So take your try at a personal attack and shove it.

YOU are the one who posted this title: Prank may lead to years in prison.

It's hysterically misleading. Anyone with a grain of sense knows he won't get any jail time. Your title is a troll. I smoke out hysterical trolls by challenging them to put their troll money where their troll mouths are. That's the extent of my "gambling."

I'm here to repeat this: He will NOT be sentenced to any jail time. You should know this, but you pretend not to.

Your "ifs" are tendentious bullshit, not to be taken seriously, and your endorsement of Fern's terminally dense "missing the forest for the trees" compilation, one big WHOOSH if there ever was one and so far from having "said it best" it isn't even funny -- means you are not worth arguing with any further.

Stop being silly, Perk. If you cannot tell the difference between "may" and "will" I can only point you in the direction of a dictionary. Wasn't a personal attack with the mention of gambling. First, it was a question to you not a statement. Secondly its an observation having seen you pull this stunt to "win" arguments in the past. There is no bet to be had with me so that'll be the end of that. I think you went a bit overboard, Perk. To each his own.

 

[Perknose]

Stop being silly, Perk. If you cannot tell the difference between "may" and "will" I can only point you in the direction of a dictionary. Wasn't a personal attack with the mention of gambling. First, it was a question to you not a statement. Secondly its an observation having seen you pull this stunt to "win" arguments in the past. There is no bet to be had with me so that'll be the end of that. I think you went a bit overboard, Perk. To each his own.

Please stop hiding behind your language. When there is little to no chance of a "may" happening, stating it, even with "may", is misleading.

Secondly, when you take the time to insert "You wouldn't happen to have a gambling problem would you?" into what is supposed to be a substantive argument and then wish to claim "Wasn't a personal attack . . ." you forfeit your right to be believed.

Let me show what you did:

PC Surgeon May Have An Honesty Problem

PC, you wouldn't happen to have an honesty problem would you?

See?

By your professed standards, there's no personal attack in the body of the thread because it's "only" a question and it's a perfectly acceptable thread title because it uses "may" and not "will."

You can have it one way, or you can have it the other, but you just can't have it both ways.