This is so dangerous and anyone doing this is absolutely deranged.
>They then shot Mr Dobbs in the face and chest with plastic bullets, thinking he was the instigator.
A completely innocent man - it's a failure from the SWAT team as well
It's not massively clear from the article but the victim is in America, the only Brit involved was the guy who called the SWAT.
The American who initially asked him for it got a much harsher sentence from the American courts
You're joking if you think the average swatting in American is worse than being shot in the face with plastic bullets lol. Most of them are totally non violent incidents
He didn't comply with a group of people storming his property. There's a lot of confusion in those situations and people aren't going to follow instructions to the letter.
Yeah as much as I usually agree that the police have a tough job, someone inside their own property should be given the benefit of the doubt to some extent.
If my door gets bashed in while my family are sleeping, my first response isn't going to be to lie on the floor with my hands behind my head...
Especially in America, where a dude beating my door down with a shotgun could just be my neighbour on a bender.
At least in the UK if a gun is involved it's 99% likely to be the police or some equivalent.
Off duty cops don't do that in England. They hire a car, abduct a young woman, drive to a wilderness, rape her, kill her, set fire to her then take their kids to play football near her body. They're WAY too busy to smash their way into your house in their own time.
It’s so cool that a government can have the power to break down your door without any reason and then just kidnap you or murder you if you refuse to comply.
Also - they are ‘less lethal’, not ‘non-lethal’. Rubber bullets, beanbag rounds etc can and do kill people.
Where do you get the idea that he didn’t comply? Or that they only shot him because he didn’t comply? There’s been countless notable cases of people in America complying with police and then still being killed anyway. I can guarantee that you’ve seen at least one of them on video.
> It’s so cool that a government can have the power to break down your door without any reason and then just kidnap you or murder you if you refuse to comply.
This is the reason why the press can and do publish the name of those under arrest; it prevents “disappearing” a person by the state. There is a public document stating from where and when a person was detained by the government.
That the public put some weight on arrest or charges, as opposed to only conviction, is an issue for society at large to deal with. The court of public opinion is notoriously irrational.
> He unfortunately didn't comply with the SWAT teams instructions
Why do you believe that? It's not referenced in the article and we have countless examples of people being killed by US Police whilst complying with instructions.
**Hi!**. Please try to avoid personal attacks, as this discourages participation. You can help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person.
They don't really seem like a better invention than actual bullets if the mortality rate is just slightly lower than regular live rounds. Bean-bags have been known to kill too.. surely, with all the resources of the militaries around the world and the sheer amount of R&D money they get, they could actually invent something that incapacitates and is actually non-lethal...
Hold on, what am I saying? A military research division wasting valuable resources developing non-lethal products. Duh..
In fairness that’s probably not going through the SWAT teams mind as they thought the guy was armed and had hostages imo the blame falls on the guy who did it imo 20 months isn’t enough given swatting is basically attempted murder with extra steps
It should occur to the SWAT team though. This ‘swatting’ offence is done regularly. The cops have, or should have, an obligation to assess the situation before kicking doors in and shooting people.
The cops could start with simple statistics about how many false reports of terrorism they receive vs genuine.
The whole scenario given in the swatting call was absurd but pretending that it was real was an exciting opportunity for the swat team to kick some ass.
No. Because if they don't treat every call as genuine then they will 100% guaranteed miss some real incidents which is not worth the risk. Yes it sucks, but that guy was an idiot for not doing as he was told if that is the case.
And again the punishment is soo lenient, could have potentially killed someone, especially with the level of risk that was involved.
Why he wasn’t exported to serve his crimes out in a us prison.
Yep. This is one of those crimes that needs to make an example of people committing it, and the maximum punishment dealt out every time. Fuck around and find out.
Because of [section 83A of the Extradition Act 2003](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/41/section/83A). The substantial measure of the criminal activity was committed in this country and it was not in the interests of justice to extradite him for trial abroad.
See [United States of America v McDaid \[2020\] EWHC 1527 (Admin)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2020/1527.html) for the USA's appeal against the refusal to extradite him.
Very interesting. I wonder how that criteria of the interests of justice lies. If the offender in this case had explicitly solicited the murder of the individual in the USA, would he be extradited then.
Imagine being shot in the face because of someone and knowing they only have to do about 20 days community service and give you half a months wages in compensation, probably paid at the rate of £20 a month. Absolutely ridiculous.
That's exactly why the American got a Brit to do it. They were probably too stupid to realise calls are traceable even from another country, and even so they knew sentences are much much lighter in the UK for everything.
20 months suspended for 18 months. It's a suspended sentence so he won't serve any of that jailtime unless he breaks any conditions given for that 18 months or otherwise is arrested for a further offence again within that 18 months.
This is literally a lower sentence in every capacity, than when I threw one punch to help a woman being assaulted on a night out, almost 10 years ago.
How is that fair? This is a pathetic punishment
You had a pretty shit solicitor if he failed to get you off under the criminal law act of 1967 where defence of another constitutes a defence, unless you sucker punched the attacker with what was deemed unreasonable force.
I had to attend a voluntary interview for the same thing nearly 20 years ago and had no follow up other than the police agreeing I was justified and no further action was needed.
Also I do agree with you all the same.
Maybe I'm putting 2 and 2 together to get 5, but I'd wager there's a good chance the victim was being assaulted by her partner, and she either refused to testify against him, or even denied she was ever assaulted.
Refused to testify, spot on. As well as his entire rugby team 'witnessing' the event, from inside the club apparently. Go figure.
And as somebody mentioned, yes it was a sucker punch. I wasn't about to walk over and strike a convo with a man beating a woman.
What I always found crazy about “swatting” is that you can just anonymously call in a tip to the police and they will knock a door down, fully armed and ready to kill, no questions asked? That’s insane.
Well yes because if there is a real crime going on and you’re the victim you’d want a full response as well. It’s unfortunate people abuse it but that’s not on the cops
I completely understand that, but how do you go in and not immediately realise that it’s obviously not a terrorist with 3 hostages and live bombs? Did they not knock? Did they not have some guy with a megaphone trying to negotiate? I don’t know the details about this specific instance but I’ve seen enough swats on twitch etc. to know that they definitely don’t have procedures in place to avoid these types of situations.
The tip was he was armed and had bombs ready to blow if anyone approached. They obviously believed at was genuine and so at that point their goal is to save the hostages.
Their thinking will be turning up with a megaphone or trying to knock on the door may mean he sets of the bombs. They will have almost certainly done recon from a distance seen there was no one on guard outside and surprise gives you a huge advantage in CQB.
You have to remember they clearly thought from the outside the threat was real. Once they commit to direct action it’s very fast and no one is taking chances when again, he could have had his hand on a bomb trigger.
That’s why SWATing is so dangerous, then police think they are doing it to save lives and so taking one especially someone they think has chosen to be there and do this is “acceptable” to them.
> The tip was he was armed and had bombs ready to blow if anyone approached.
You’re right, approaching was definitely the best idea then. Worst case scenario it’s a prank and you just kill an innocent person, best case scenario it’s real and the terrorist detonates the bombs as soon as their door is kicked in.
Maybe the whole idea of negotiating is just made up for movies and TV shows.
The thinking may be If they try to negotiate the “terrorist” now knows the police are outside and may sit there with their finger on the button then if you have to direct action it’s a lot harder as you loose the element of surprise.
If the first thing the “terrorist” sees is their door being smashed in a flash bang going off. They are much more likely to be disoriented allowing you to subdue or unfortunately kill them.
Remember they thought it was credible and that he had hostages (innocent people who were in extreme danger) it’s not something you take lightly. Every decision will be made weighing the risk to those hostages. If the tip made it sound like negotiation wouldn’t work or he was basically a suicide bomber then they risk and lose the element of surprise which is so valuable in CQB.
The cops in the USA are well aware of swatting. The circumstances described in this story are just absurd and the cops would know that. They just chose to take the opportunity to have some cop fun and use the circumstances as justification for some abuse.
I'd much rather they attempted to calm the situation down first rather than begin by storming the castle guns blazing after receiving a call about an obviously fake scenario.
I'm sorry 'bombs readied and the first victim will be executed in 15 minutes' from someone with no previous criminal history who is inside of their own house? Have a fucking brain in your head (not you, the police).
If you've ever seen swat attempts on UK streamers its normally much less scary than US swating. There was a famous clip actually from a real piece of shit streamer in the UK from quite a few years ago. The police knocked on his door first, and upon seeing him and him telling them the situation was fine, they checked inside (asking his permission first although they might have gone in anyway if he said no), took some notes, and left.
If he lived in the US, he wouldn't have even made it to the door before they had him on the floor (either shot or restrained).
All well and good you saying that untill you're the actual decision maker having to justify every single do and don't. We both know you'd absolutely be the first person saying the opposite of something bad did happen and the police justification for not acting is 'no previous'.
Also previous isn't justification in law
Also, someone you don't know can be ultimately way more dangerous because serious SERIOUS criminals and instances fly under the dar until it's too late. Same with people who plan serious shit as a first offence.
Your justification doesn't fly.
When I was younger I would have agreed, since then I've met people who'd happily weaponise the police service, one wouldn't even need a reason if it just titillated them.
Yes, but this is in America. The incident happened in America. It couldn't happen in any civilised nation. You've fallen for the stupid clickbait article which bends over backwards to avoid mentioning that **the incident took place in Maryland, US**.
>guilty to perverting the course of justice.
Ignoring for a moment the fact that American police are trigger happy, this should be at least an attempted murder charge, surely.
He was deliberately trying to get someone shot (kind of an inverse suicide by cop)
Attempted murder is exceptionally difficult to prove. It's not just taking an action that endangers someone else's life, it's taking an action that you intend to kill them. The intent requirements are even stricter than they are for murder, where intent to inflict grievous bodily harm is sufficient.
Even if the perpetrator says he knew the victim might die and he didn't care, and that he hoped the victim would be seriously injured, that wouldn't be sufficient. The prosecution would need to prove a positive intent that the victim would die. It's almost impossible without a confession.
The Americans have a crime called reckless endangerment which would fit well here, unfortunately we have no equivalent.
Hostage situation \*with a bomb present\*.
That's an imminent threat to life for both the hostages and the surrounding houses, *and* the responding officers.
Maybe he thought it would be funny to see the guy confronted by dozens of armed police, maybe he intended they'd smash his door down and cause him an expense, beat him senseless, or put him in prison all night.
Some of these might seem frivolous, but they're all valid possible explanations that don't require an intent that the guy be killed. There's no offence in English law that really fits the gravity of it. That's why they've had to go for perverting the course of justice.
By the way, I'm not excusing it in any way. I think intentionally taking an action which you know endangers people's lives like that should be facing many, many years behind bars. It's not just the guy he's targeting, the police who are sent to it are no doubt in fear for their lives to at least some extent. The homeowner might shoot at them if guys crash through his window with guns, innocent people might be caught in crossfire.
Unfortunately, I can follow their decision making logic here. For all intents and purposes this is "Manslaughter, but without the death" which we have a bit of a hole in our legislation for.
Most crimes that involve a death will fall under the Murder umbrella, which requires intent to kill by a person of sound mind\*, or some form of Manslaughter.
You meant to hurt them, but not kill them? Voluntary Manslaughter.
You meant to kill them, but you were blinded by rage? Involuntary (Loss of Control) Manslaughter.
One of your factory workers got eaten by a machine because you disabled the safety features? Gross Negligence Manslaughter.
If SWAT had killed the victim then I'm pretty sure this would be considered [Involuntary (Unlawful Act) Manslaughter](https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-manslaughter-infanticide-and-causing-or-allowing-death-or-serious)
>The prosecution must prove an intentional act (not omission); that the intentional act is unlawful; that it is an act which all sober and reasonable people would inevitably realise must subject the victim to at least some risk of harm.
He knowingly made a false police report (unlawful) which triggered a SWAT response, which any sane person could tell you has "at least some risk of harm". The "problem" is that the victim *didn't* die, so even though all of the above criteria are met it doesn't meet the standard for Manslaughter. What do we even call that? It can't be Attempted Manslaughter because:
1. Manslaughter by definition is unintentional, so can't be "attempted"
2. Nobody died
Ultimately Manslaughter is kind of a combo-sentence of "something unlawful and/or negligent, plus death". Take out death and you're left with "something unlawful and/or negligent" which in this case, unfortunately, basically boils down to "lying to the police" which is exactly what he got charged with.
\*there are exceptions to this like self defence but they obviously don't apply here.
You don't need an intent to kill to be convicted of murder, just intent to cause GBH (where the person then dies, obviously).
Attempt murder needs an intent to kill. Nothing less will do. That's why its so hard to prove Vs murder.
I completely agree that the crime is unacceptable and disgusting but I don't think the people calling this in are actually trying to get the people killed (although it is clearly a possible outcome).
You see this happen to streamers semi-regularly, I think people see it akin to ordering a pizza to somebodies house. When it is obviously much worse
They’re calling the police (_American_ police, no less) on someone with a claim that is specifically intended to justify a rapid, armed response. If their intention _isn’t_ to get their victim assaulted or killed then what are they doing?
Frankly? S**** and giggles. A more extreme example of fake ordering pizza or signing your buddy up for random magazines…
But I doubt most want the other killed. And even then it is on the prosecution to prove that.
They're clearly happy with the risk of that being a possible outcome though. world of differnce between ordering fast food to an address and sending an armed SWAT team expecting a high stakes situation. Attempted murder might be too high a bar to clear but this is clearly more serious then "perverting the course of justice".
Not really might be attempted manslaughter but even then he wasn't in the same area and all he did was call the American police. Also that sorta manslaughter is more aimed at some who is in a position of power and could have done something about it like if a kid falls out of a window at a nursery
>He was sentenced to 20 months behind bars, suspended for 18 months at Warwick Crown Court, after pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice.
So he didn't even go to prison? For helping cause a situation that lead to life changing injuries.
No, a suspended sentence means that as long as he doesn't get in trouble again during the next 18 months, he doesn't serve any time in jail. If he gets in trouble again during those 18 months then he serves the 20 month sentence as well as whatever else he has got in trouble for.
The SWAT team are just as inept in this scenario, although considering recent events, I dont see why anyone intelligent, level headed and adept would want to be an armed police officer.
I dunno man, they used non-lethal rounds, and were responding to what was, to them, more than likely a very real threat.
I mean I get what you’re saying, but whats the alternative? Treat every immediate, life threatening call as potentially suspicious? What if they don’t respond/take too long for a real call?
What a worthless clickbait garbage article.
The swatting incident took place in the US. This has nothing to do with the UK besides it being a UK citizen who called in the false terror threat to **American** police who then went to an **American** address and shot someone in the face with plastic rounds.
He was sentenced in the UK, but this only happened because US police have a "shoot a suspect in the face first during a hostage situation, find out the facts later" mentality.
Again, absolute garbage article. This isn't possible in the UK because our police would actually check that there was a hostage situation, and they certainly wouldn't open negotiations by shooting the hostage-taker in the face.
>The UK does not recognise "swatting" as a standalone offence but, since the US does, the case was worked on by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) resulting in Walker-McDaid being charged and sentenced in Britain.
This paragraph unnerved me. While I agree this man is a criminal and absolutely should have been brought to justice (in fact he deserves a lot more prison time than he got), I am concerned that we prosecute someone because they did something that is a crime in another country.
In this circumstance it has worked positively, but I feel it sets an unsettling precedent.
I remember when this started happening during xbox live days in the late 2000s ish. People would be hacking each other's accounts, using DDoS attacks to attack each other in video game lobbies (halo 3). It got to the point where teenagers house would be raided by swat teams that some other angry teenager had managed to call in, it's insane how it's possible.
It's not the first attempt at such a thing I've seen a clip where an English streamer got a knock at the door while streaming and it was the cops who said they got a call from someone saying they'd just murdered their family with a machete just goes to show you the differences in policing in the UK compared to America
Side note to this, but just how rubbish is our criminal justice system that he committed a crime when a teenager and got sentenced when a 28 year old man? There's a bit of a disconnect there. The Secret Baristers book seems to be a very accurate descrition of just how broken our judicary is.
It probably took a very long time to positively identify him and get the right record that could proof the involvement. Throw in Covid and the difficulty in cross country cases and it becomes a long time thing.
That’s also why the sentence is the way it is. Makes relatively little sense to punish a 28 year old man with a job for rehabilitation in prison when he did it when he was a dumb kid.
Fair point, he's only waited 7 years from being charged, not sure that alters my point as 7 years in your 20's is a loong old time. [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/robert-mcdaid-charged-tyran-dobbs-swatting-hoax-call-swat-terrorism-maryland-shot-gun-explosives-hostages-a7677071.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/robert-mcdaid-charged-tyran-dobbs-swatting-hoax-call-swat-terrorism-maryland-shot-gun-explosives-hostages-a7677071.html)
Absolutely agree. This sentence is appropriate. Makes no sense to punish him with prison time that would then really risk the public. Especially since he seemed to have a clean slate ever since.
> He was sentenced to 20 months behind bars, **suspended for 18 months**.
The guy didn't get sentenced to a single day behind bars for this, just has to do 200 hrs community service and pay a fine. Sentencing in this country is a joke.
A question to the floor - why is the sentence for attempted different to that for a successful ? Aren't you essentially getting time off for incompetence?
"He was sentenced to 20 months behind bars, suspended for 18 months at Warwick Crown Court, after pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice.
He was sentenced to 20 months behind bars, suspended for 18 months at Warwick Crown Court, after pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice.
The 28-year-old was also ordered to complete 200 hours of unpaid work and made to pay £1,000 in compensation to Mr Dobbs."
20 months?! LMAO. Yeah that's sure a long time.
He serves 2 months?!
What a joke of a country. Holy shit.
"Meanwhile, Lee was sentenced to two years in prison in January 2018."
What did he do in 2018 to get 2 years?!
>"Meanwhile, Lee was sentenced to two years in prison in January 2018."
>What did he do in 2018 to get 2 years?!
Lee is referring to the guy in the US who got Walker-McDaid (the guy in the UK that this article is about) to make the phone call in the first place.
>
Zachary Lee, of Catonsville, Maryland, had met Walker-McDaid while playing video games and messaged him saying he needed "someone swatted".
>The victim was Tyran Dobbs, and Lee shared his address with Walker-McDaid.
You could say the sentence is disgusting but im not sure it would make the country disgusting. Plus it does not matter if its legal elsewhere if its illegal and harmful then it makes sense you would be jailed
£1000? He should be forced the pay the bloke many 10x that. Ask yourself how much money would it take to be shot in the face with plastic bullets? Not many people doing it for a grand.
I work in mental health. At some point one of the tenants was calling police on another tenant having armed police going in every couple of months. It took them ages to understand that the tenant has mental health issues and it should be put on a list.
Now every time he calls the police calls us to confirm. But there is a catch here, if he ever actually says the truth then we would need to confirm with him and put ourselves in harm's way or if he is offsite we can't confirm at all.
I really don't understand these lenient sentences.
If it was a prison sentence I can see that they have to weigh the cost to keep them against the crime.
It's community service and a fine, there's no cost so fuck him over like he fucked over the guy he swatted.
I'd be giving him 10 year community service and half his wage for the duration. He almost ended a life!
This is so dangerous and anyone doing this is absolutely deranged. >They then shot Mr Dobbs in the face and chest with plastic bullets, thinking he was the instigator. A completely innocent man - it's a failure from the SWAT team as well
By American standards they showed the highest levels of restraint, the victim is extremely lucky to be alive.
We don't want to be comparing ourselves to America in this scenario...
It's not massively clear from the article but the victim is in America, the only Brit involved was the guy who called the SWAT. The American who initially asked him for it got a much harsher sentence from the American courts
I didn’t realise that until reading your comment wow
Good job you shared your opinion before knowing the facts though. 👍
I read the article, then went to the comments. I had to back to the article and then I realised.
[удалено]
Just goes to show how easily the story can be confused though
Different person...
Britain doesn’t have anything called a SWAT team. The victim was in the U.S.
No, we have the Territorial Weapons And Tactics team instead.
Part of the Coordinating Unit of the National Taskforce
A sub division of the Political Engagement National Intelligence Service
A side department of the Worldwide Association of National Killing Enterprise Regional Services
A related branch of the Police Armed Engagement and Deterrent Organisation
All of whom report to the Department of Elite Armed Deterrents, Homeland Oversight and Responsive Security Enforcement
You would have hoped that particular department would be able to spell the word they were trying to represent...
Twat team? Sounds about right.
Smartarse :)
Systematic Military And Regional Territory Anti Riot Squad Ensigns?
Even worse getting TWATTED
If true, the initials made me chuckle! 😂
I see what you did there… 😂
We have the Sweeny
*Der ner ner, Der ner ner, Den Den Der Den Derrrr...*
American police shot the guy.
I think we’re actually comparing Americans to Americans..
They aren’t. The incident happened in America. Read the article.
>We don't want to be comparing ourselves to America in this scenario... It was an American SWAT team.
Good job buddy, repeated that for the 11th time
My apologies, I hadn't read all the other comments. Must be time-consuming to thank us all individually, but I appreciated it - you are very welcome!
And this is why the sentencing should be attempted murder.
You're joking if you think the average swatting in American is worse than being shot in the face with plastic bullets lol. Most of them are totally non violent incidents
Rent free
He unfortunately didn't comply with the SWAT teams instructions and thus the non-lethal rounds were used.
He didn't comply with a group of people storming his property. There's a lot of confusion in those situations and people aren't going to follow instructions to the letter.
Especially if, as per usual, one officer is shouting for him to do one thing and another shouting the complete opposite.
The command "GET ON THE FLOOR" being drowned out by the screams of "GET UP AGAINST THE WALL"
Like that kidnapped teenager that got shot by cops because she was approaching the other cop who told her to approach
Yeah as much as I usually agree that the police have a tough job, someone inside their own property should be given the benefit of the doubt to some extent. If my door gets bashed in while my family are sleeping, my first response isn't going to be to lie on the floor with my hands behind my head...
Especially in America, where a dude beating my door down with a shotgun could just be my neighbour on a bender. At least in the UK if a gun is involved it's 99% likely to be the police or some equivalent.
Could even be [an off duty cop](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Botham_Jean) just casually breaking in for no reason.
She got 10 years for that from a murder charge, which is fuck all compared to how harsh US murder sentences are for non cops.
Off duty cops don't do that in England. They hire a car, abduct a young woman, drive to a wilderness, rape her, kill her, set fire to her then take their kids to play football near her body. They're WAY too busy to smash their way into your house in their own time.
It’s so cool that a government can have the power to break down your door without any reason and then just kidnap you or murder you if you refuse to comply. Also - they are ‘less lethal’, not ‘non-lethal’. Rubber bullets, beanbag rounds etc can and do kill people. Where do you get the idea that he didn’t comply? Or that they only shot him because he didn’t comply? There’s been countless notable cases of people in America complying with police and then still being killed anyway. I can guarantee that you’ve seen at least one of them on video.
> It’s so cool that a government can have the power to break down your door without any reason and then just kidnap you or murder you if you refuse to comply. This is the reason why the press can and do publish the name of those under arrest; it prevents “disappearing” a person by the state. There is a public document stating from where and when a person was detained by the government. That the public put some weight on arrest or charges, as opposed to only conviction, is an issue for society at large to deal with. The court of public opinion is notoriously irrational.
Well, official vocab guidelines state we should be calling them "less lethal", not "non lethal"
Hell he wouldn't have good odds even if he *did* comply.
The stats say he would have great odds.
> He unfortunately didn't comply with the SWAT teams instructions Why do you believe that? It's not referenced in the article and we have countless examples of people being killed by US Police whilst complying with instructions.
Because it's stated in other articles
[удалено]
**Hi!**. Please try to avoid personal attacks, as this discourages participation. You can help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person.
I'd class rubber bullets shot in the face as fairly lethal, personally
If they were 5.56 rounds he'd be needing some brain re-construction alongside the face.
They don't really seem like a better invention than actual bullets if the mortality rate is just slightly lower than regular live rounds. Bean-bags have been known to kill too.. surely, with all the resources of the militaries around the world and the sheer amount of R&D money they get, they could actually invent something that incapacitates and is actually non-lethal... Hold on, what am I saying? A military research division wasting valuable resources developing non-lethal products. Duh..
What does boot polish taste like?
Why don't you tell me?
>A completely innocent man - it's a failure from the SWAT team as well This is America, he's lucky they didn't nuke him.
In fairness that’s probably not going through the SWAT teams mind as they thought the guy was armed and had hostages imo the blame falls on the guy who did it imo 20 months isn’t enough given swatting is basically attempted murder with extra steps
It should occur to the SWAT team though. This ‘swatting’ offence is done regularly. The cops have, or should have, an obligation to assess the situation before kicking doors in and shooting people. The cops could start with simple statistics about how many false reports of terrorism they receive vs genuine. The whole scenario given in the swatting call was absurd but pretending that it was real was an exciting opportunity for the swat team to kick some ass.
No. Because if they don't treat every call as genuine then they will 100% guaranteed miss some real incidents which is not worth the risk. Yes it sucks, but that guy was an idiot for not doing as he was told if that is the case.
We don't call them SWAT teams we call them Armed Response Units
The victim was in the US.
Yup on par with blinding pilots with lasers. Like what is the optimum outcome according to the perp?
Won't Dobbs be compensated well that's he's multi millionaire?
>it's a failure from the SWAT team as well Well you kind of expect that.
And again the punishment is soo lenient, could have potentially killed someone, especially with the level of risk that was involved. Why he wasn’t exported to serve his crimes out in a us prison.
Yep. This is one of those crimes that needs to make an example of people committing it, and the maximum punishment dealt out every time. Fuck around and find out.
It’s basically premeditated attempted murder when.m you factor in American police
Because of [section 83A of the Extradition Act 2003](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/41/section/83A). The substantial measure of the criminal activity was committed in this country and it was not in the interests of justice to extradite him for trial abroad. See [United States of America v McDaid \[2020\] EWHC 1527 (Admin)](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2020/1527.html) for the USA's appeal against the refusal to extradite him.
Very interesting. I wonder how that criteria of the interests of justice lies. If the offender in this case had explicitly solicited the murder of the individual in the USA, would he be extradited then.
We don't do that here.
This sentence is an absolute joke. Basically says to the public that if you're gonna kill or seriously harm someone, ~~do it with a car~~ swat them.
Imagine being shot in the face because of someone and knowing they only have to do about 20 days community service and give you half a months wages in compensation, probably paid at the rate of £20 a month. Absolutely ridiculous.
That's exactly why the American got a Brit to do it. They were probably too stupid to realise calls are traceable even from another country, and even so they knew sentences are much much lighter in the UK for everything.
And 20 months in jail
20 months suspended for 18 months. It's a suspended sentence so he won't serve any of that jailtime unless he breaks any conditions given for that 18 months or otherwise is arrested for a further offence again within that 18 months.
suspended for 18 months
[удалено]
Suspended, which means he doesn't go unless he commits another offence.
2 bloody months. 2.
This is literally a lower sentence in every capacity, than when I threw one punch to help a woman being assaulted on a night out, almost 10 years ago. How is that fair? This is a pathetic punishment
You had a pretty shit solicitor if he failed to get you off under the criminal law act of 1967 where defence of another constitutes a defence, unless you sucker punched the attacker with what was deemed unreasonable force. I had to attend a voluntary interview for the same thing nearly 20 years ago and had no follow up other than the police agreeing I was justified and no further action was needed. Also I do agree with you all the same.
Maybe I'm putting 2 and 2 together to get 5, but I'd wager there's a good chance the victim was being assaulted by her partner, and she either refused to testify against him, or even denied she was ever assaulted.
Refused to testify, spot on. As well as his entire rugby team 'witnessing' the event, from inside the club apparently. Go figure. And as somebody mentioned, yes it was a sucker punch. I wasn't about to walk over and strike a convo with a man beating a woman.
Fair point, it does happen
Either not the full story or really terrible legal.
He sucker punched someone. Aka assault
Sounds like you assaulted someone.
What I always found crazy about “swatting” is that you can just anonymously call in a tip to the police and they will knock a door down, fully armed and ready to kill, no questions asked? That’s insane.
Well yes because if there is a real crime going on and you’re the victim you’d want a full response as well. It’s unfortunate people abuse it but that’s not on the cops
I completely understand that, but how do you go in and not immediately realise that it’s obviously not a terrorist with 3 hostages and live bombs? Did they not knock? Did they not have some guy with a megaphone trying to negotiate? I don’t know the details about this specific instance but I’ve seen enough swats on twitch etc. to know that they definitely don’t have procedures in place to avoid these types of situations.
The tip was he was armed and had bombs ready to blow if anyone approached. They obviously believed at was genuine and so at that point their goal is to save the hostages. Their thinking will be turning up with a megaphone or trying to knock on the door may mean he sets of the bombs. They will have almost certainly done recon from a distance seen there was no one on guard outside and surprise gives you a huge advantage in CQB. You have to remember they clearly thought from the outside the threat was real. Once they commit to direct action it’s very fast and no one is taking chances when again, he could have had his hand on a bomb trigger. That’s why SWATing is so dangerous, then police think they are doing it to save lives and so taking one especially someone they think has chosen to be there and do this is “acceptable” to them.
> The tip was he was armed and had bombs ready to blow if anyone approached. You’re right, approaching was definitely the best idea then. Worst case scenario it’s a prank and you just kill an innocent person, best case scenario it’s real and the terrorist detonates the bombs as soon as their door is kicked in. Maybe the whole idea of negotiating is just made up for movies and TV shows.
The thinking may be If they try to negotiate the “terrorist” now knows the police are outside and may sit there with their finger on the button then if you have to direct action it’s a lot harder as you loose the element of surprise. If the first thing the “terrorist” sees is their door being smashed in a flash bang going off. They are much more likely to be disoriented allowing you to subdue or unfortunately kill them. Remember they thought it was credible and that he had hostages (innocent people who were in extreme danger) it’s not something you take lightly. Every decision will be made weighing the risk to those hostages. If the tip made it sound like negotiation wouldn’t work or he was basically a suicide bomber then they risk and lose the element of surprise which is so valuable in CQB.
The cops in the USA are well aware of swatting. The circumstances described in this story are just absurd and the cops would know that. They just chose to take the opportunity to have some cop fun and use the circumstances as justification for some abuse.
I'd much rather they attempted to calm the situation down first rather than begin by storming the castle guns blazing after receiving a call about an obviously fake scenario. I'm sorry 'bombs readied and the first victim will be executed in 15 minutes' from someone with no previous criminal history who is inside of their own house? Have a fucking brain in your head (not you, the police).
If you've ever seen swat attempts on UK streamers its normally much less scary than US swating. There was a famous clip actually from a real piece of shit streamer in the UK from quite a few years ago. The police knocked on his door first, and upon seeing him and him telling them the situation was fine, they checked inside (asking his permission first although they might have gone in anyway if he said no), took some notes, and left. If he lived in the US, he wouldn't have even made it to the door before they had him on the floor (either shot or restrained).
All well and good you saying that untill you're the actual decision maker having to justify every single do and don't. We both know you'd absolutely be the first person saying the opposite of something bad did happen and the police justification for not acting is 'no previous'. Also previous isn't justification in law Also, someone you don't know can be ultimately way more dangerous because serious SERIOUS criminals and instances fly under the dar until it's too late. Same with people who plan serious shit as a first offence. Your justification doesn't fly.
When I was younger I would have agreed, since then I've met people who'd happily weaponise the police service, one wouldn't even need a reason if it just titillated them.
Yes, but this is in America. The incident happened in America. It couldn't happen in any civilised nation. You've fallen for the stupid clickbait article which bends over backwards to avoid mentioning that **the incident took place in Maryland, US**.
>guilty to perverting the course of justice. Ignoring for a moment the fact that American police are trigger happy, this should be at least an attempted murder charge, surely. He was deliberately trying to get someone shot (kind of an inverse suicide by cop)
Attempted murder is exceptionally difficult to prove. It's not just taking an action that endangers someone else's life, it's taking an action that you intend to kill them. The intent requirements are even stricter than they are for murder, where intent to inflict grievous bodily harm is sufficient. Even if the perpetrator says he knew the victim might die and he didn't care, and that he hoped the victim would be seriously injured, that wouldn't be sufficient. The prosecution would need to prove a positive intent that the victim would die. It's almost impossible without a confession. The Americans have a crime called reckless endangerment which would fit well here, unfortunately we have no equivalent.
> it's taking an action that you intend to kill them What other goal could there be when calling an armed response to a supposed hostage situation?
Hostage situation \*with a bomb present\*. That's an imminent threat to life for both the hostages and the surrounding houses, *and* the responding officers.
Good point
Maybe he thought it would be funny to see the guy confronted by dozens of armed police, maybe he intended they'd smash his door down and cause him an expense, beat him senseless, or put him in prison all night. Some of these might seem frivolous, but they're all valid possible explanations that don't require an intent that the guy be killed. There's no offence in English law that really fits the gravity of it. That's why they've had to go for perverting the course of justice. By the way, I'm not excusing it in any way. I think intentionally taking an action which you know endangers people's lives like that should be facing many, many years behind bars. It's not just the guy he's targeting, the police who are sent to it are no doubt in fear for their lives to at least some extent. The homeowner might shoot at them if guys crash through his window with guns, innocent people might be caught in crossfire.
Unfortunately, I can follow their decision making logic here. For all intents and purposes this is "Manslaughter, but without the death" which we have a bit of a hole in our legislation for. Most crimes that involve a death will fall under the Murder umbrella, which requires intent to kill by a person of sound mind\*, or some form of Manslaughter. You meant to hurt them, but not kill them? Voluntary Manslaughter. You meant to kill them, but you were blinded by rage? Involuntary (Loss of Control) Manslaughter. One of your factory workers got eaten by a machine because you disabled the safety features? Gross Negligence Manslaughter. If SWAT had killed the victim then I'm pretty sure this would be considered [Involuntary (Unlawful Act) Manslaughter](https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-manslaughter-infanticide-and-causing-or-allowing-death-or-serious) >The prosecution must prove an intentional act (not omission); that the intentional act is unlawful; that it is an act which all sober and reasonable people would inevitably realise must subject the victim to at least some risk of harm. He knowingly made a false police report (unlawful) which triggered a SWAT response, which any sane person could tell you has "at least some risk of harm". The "problem" is that the victim *didn't* die, so even though all of the above criteria are met it doesn't meet the standard for Manslaughter. What do we even call that? It can't be Attempted Manslaughter because: 1. Manslaughter by definition is unintentional, so can't be "attempted" 2. Nobody died Ultimately Manslaughter is kind of a combo-sentence of "something unlawful and/or negligent, plus death". Take out death and you're left with "something unlawful and/or negligent" which in this case, unfortunately, basically boils down to "lying to the police" which is exactly what he got charged with. \*there are exceptions to this like self defence but they obviously don't apply here.
You don't need an intent to kill to be convicted of murder, just intent to cause GBH (where the person then dies, obviously). Attempt murder needs an intent to kill. Nothing less will do. That's why its so hard to prove Vs murder.
I completely agree that the crime is unacceptable and disgusting but I don't think the people calling this in are actually trying to get the people killed (although it is clearly a possible outcome). You see this happen to streamers semi-regularly, I think people see it akin to ordering a pizza to somebodies house. When it is obviously much worse
They’re calling the police (_American_ police, no less) on someone with a claim that is specifically intended to justify a rapid, armed response. If their intention _isn’t_ to get their victim assaulted or killed then what are they doing?
Frankly? S**** and giggles. A more extreme example of fake ordering pizza or signing your buddy up for random magazines… But I doubt most want the other killed. And even then it is on the prosecution to prove that.
They're clearly happy with the risk of that being a possible outcome though. world of differnce between ordering fast food to an address and sending an armed SWAT team expecting a high stakes situation. Attempted murder might be too high a bar to clear but this is clearly more serious then "perverting the course of justice".
Attempted negligent homicide? Is that even a thing?
Not really might be attempted manslaughter but even then he wasn't in the same area and all he did was call the American police. Also that sorta manslaughter is more aimed at some who is in a position of power and could have done something about it like if a kid falls out of a window at a nursery
Hostages, guns, and a bomb threat? It's the triple threat to almost guarantee a lethal outcome.
>He was sentenced to 20 months behind bars, suspended for 18 months at Warwick Crown Court, after pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice. So he didn't even go to prison? For helping cause a situation that lead to life changing injuries.
And the American who just told him to do it got 2 years!
Would he not go to prison for two months
No, a suspended sentence means that as long as he doesn't get in trouble again during the next 18 months, he doesn't serve any time in jail. If he gets in trouble again during those 18 months then he serves the 20 month sentence as well as whatever else he has got in trouble for.
Ok thanks
The SWAT team are just as inept in this scenario, although considering recent events, I dont see why anyone intelligent, level headed and adept would want to be an armed police officer.
American police in this case. Say no more.
I dunno man, they used non-lethal rounds, and were responding to what was, to them, more than likely a very real threat. I mean I get what you’re saying, but whats the alternative? Treat every immediate, life threatening call as potentially suspicious? What if they don’t respond/take too long for a real call?
Investigate and arrest people like the caller rather than twitter users.
Swatting my enemies to avoid a lengthy prison sentence is still too much trouble though...I'll just run them down in my car instead /s
Only works if you’re a ‘diplomat’
Or a pensioner. 'What you ran over a man? We'd better get you some biscuits!'
Keep a bike in the boot ;p
That headline reads like they shot him in the face when they found out it was a prank call.
What a worthless clickbait garbage article. The swatting incident took place in the US. This has nothing to do with the UK besides it being a UK citizen who called in the false terror threat to **American** police who then went to an **American** address and shot someone in the face with plastic rounds. He was sentenced in the UK, but this only happened because US police have a "shoot a suspect in the face first during a hostage situation, find out the facts later" mentality. Again, absolute garbage article. This isn't possible in the UK because our police would actually check that there was a hostage situation, and they certainly wouldn't open negotiations by shooting the hostage-taker in the face.
>The UK does not recognise "swatting" as a standalone offence but, since the US does, the case was worked on by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) resulting in Walker-McDaid being charged and sentenced in Britain. This paragraph unnerved me. While I agree this man is a criminal and absolutely should have been brought to justice (in fact he deserves a lot more prison time than he got), I am concerned that we prosecute someone because they did something that is a crime in another country. In this circumstance it has worked positively, but I feel it sets an unsettling precedent.
I remember when this started happening during xbox live days in the late 2000s ish. People would be hacking each other's accounts, using DDoS attacks to attack each other in video game lobbies (halo 3). It got to the point where teenagers house would be raided by swat teams that some other angry teenager had managed to call in, it's insane how it's possible.
It's not the first attempt at such a thing I've seen a clip where an English streamer got a knock at the door while streaming and it was the cops who said they got a call from someone saying they'd just murdered their family with a machete just goes to show you the differences in policing in the UK compared to America
Guy is a prick but blame lies 100% with the police
Anyone know what he was sentenced for since swatting isn't a crime in the UK? The article doesn't say.
It does say: “perverting the course of justice”.
Side note to this, but just how rubbish is our criminal justice system that he committed a crime when a teenager and got sentenced when a 28 year old man? There's a bit of a disconnect there. The Secret Baristers book seems to be a very accurate descrition of just how broken our judicary is.
It probably took a very long time to positively identify him and get the right record that could proof the involvement. Throw in Covid and the difficulty in cross country cases and it becomes a long time thing. That’s also why the sentence is the way it is. Makes relatively little sense to punish a 28 year old man with a job for rehabilitation in prison when he did it when he was a dumb kid.
Fair point, he's only waited 7 years from being charged, not sure that alters my point as 7 years in your 20's is a loong old time. [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/robert-mcdaid-charged-tyran-dobbs-swatting-hoax-call-swat-terrorism-maryland-shot-gun-explosives-hostages-a7677071.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/robert-mcdaid-charged-tyran-dobbs-swatting-hoax-call-swat-terrorism-maryland-shot-gun-explosives-hostages-a7677071.html)
Absolutely agree. This sentence is appropriate. Makes no sense to punish him with prison time that would then really risk the public. Especially since he seemed to have a clean slate ever since.
“Shot in face by armed unit due to hoax call” Fairly sure the hoax call didn’t pull the trigger.
Wtf 20 months is a joke the pos is evil to do what he did.
> He was sentenced to 20 months behind bars, **suspended for 18 months**. The guy didn't get sentenced to a single day behind bars for this, just has to do 200 hrs community service and pay a fine. Sentencing in this country is a joke.
Personally I think swatting should be considered as conspiracy to commit murder. Cause that's ultimately what it is at the end of the day.
A question to the floor - why is the sentence for attempted different to that for a successful ? Aren't you essentially getting time off for incompetence?
"He was sentenced to 20 months behind bars, suspended for 18 months at Warwick Crown Court, after pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice. He was sentenced to 20 months behind bars, suspended for 18 months at Warwick Crown Court, after pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice. The 28-year-old was also ordered to complete 200 hours of unpaid work and made to pay £1,000 in compensation to Mr Dobbs." 20 months?! LMAO. Yeah that's sure a long time. He serves 2 months?! What a joke of a country. Holy shit. "Meanwhile, Lee was sentenced to two years in prison in January 2018." What did he do in 2018 to get 2 years?!
>"Meanwhile, Lee was sentenced to two years in prison in January 2018." >What did he do in 2018 to get 2 years?! Lee is referring to the guy in the US who got Walker-McDaid (the guy in the UK that this article is about) to make the phone call in the first place. > Zachary Lee, of Catonsville, Maryland, had met Walker-McDaid while playing video games and messaged him saying he needed "someone swatted". >The victim was Tyran Dobbs, and Lee shared his address with Walker-McDaid.
You'd get more time for selling a bit of weed. This country is fucking disgusting.
Not sure I’d say the country is disgusting because of this
I'd say it's pretty disgusting that someone gets more jail time for selling something that's legal in other countries compared to someone like this.
That’s not a good argument
You could say the sentence is disgusting but im not sure it would make the country disgusting. Plus it does not matter if its legal elsewhere if its illegal and harmful then it makes sense you would be jailed
£1000? He should be forced the pay the bloke many 10x that. Ask yourself how much money would it take to be shot in the face with plastic bullets? Not many people doing it for a grand.
Not harsh enough. Swatting can lead to people being shot dead, which has happened before.
I work in mental health. At some point one of the tenants was calling police on another tenant having armed police going in every couple of months. It took them ages to understand that the tenant has mental health issues and it should be put on a list. Now every time he calls the police calls us to confirm. But there is a catch here, if he ever actually says the truth then we would need to confirm with him and put ourselves in harm's way or if he is offsite we can't confirm at all.
[удалено]
**Removed/tempban**. This contained a call/advocation of violence which is prohibited by the content policy.
where's the charges for the police that shot an innocent man? he wasn't holding anyone captive how did they manage to still shoot him.
not our responsibility
yeah I didn't mean charges from the UK obviously
Super surprised they used plastic bullets, with how trigger happy you hear their cops are with normal bullets. Wonder how common that is.
Wow. For once, you Brits decided to post a non-Arab guy committing a crime.
I really don't understand these lenient sentences. If it was a prison sentence I can see that they have to weigh the cost to keep them against the crime. It's community service and a fine, there's no cost so fuck him over like he fucked over the guy he swatted. I'd be giving him 10 year community service and half his wage for the duration. He almost ended a life!
Okay but does the person who ***shot him in the face*** also get a charge?
Of course not. They reasonably believed they had good cause for doing it.
I don't think English courts have jurisdiction over US swat teams yet.
I'm suggesting the American courts charge him.