Oregon man detained after Internet posting

Originally posted by kattraxx
Isn't it odd that this guy makes a comment in a chat room and all hell breaks loose? However, in cases where an ex harrasses, threatens and terrorizes a woman, nothing is done until she's dead? If we're going to start jumping right on "threats", let's include threats from people with a proven propensity for carrying them out-- as in, thousands of dead women with restraining orders. I'm just saying...

Let’s not get this thread diverted with some side issue of Domestic Abuse. Threatening to knock-out your spouse is entirely different than making a public threat to kill the President or blow-up a building. Both issues are treated entirely differently by the law – and well they should be.


[edit on 16-2-2008 by passenger]

[edit on 16-2-2008 by passenger]

reply to post by mmmeat

An arrest record isn't necessarily a criminal record.

What? They are one in the same. If you have been arrested, you have been processed. You have a criminal record. Never really dealt with the justice system have you? I'm glad by friend is an assistant DA. She is great in these cases.

sorry galloping. warning headed. I was typing while your post came up.

[edit on 2/16/2008 by palehorse23]

edited to remove personnal attack

[edit on 16-2-2008 by gallopinghordes]

An arrest record isn't necessarily a criminal record.

What? They are one in the same. If you have been arrested, you have been processed. You have a criminal record. your games are getting amusing at this point.

They are not. A person that has been arrested numerous times for burglary - but never convicted - is not a burglar (at least in the eyes of the law). Arrest for various offenses such as drunk driving, sexual assualt, etc., do not count towards enhanced sentencing. Convictions do. It's a nebulous term (criminal record) and is tossed around a lot. But there is a major difference between what is applicable and what is not.

Originally posted by FredT

Are you suggesting that if the Columbine killers should have been left to carry out thier plans if someone had alerted the police if they had bragged about it online?

dont know if this has been mentioned... and its kinda off topic... but

the police were informed about the 2 columbine kids webpage and other various things online before the shootings.. .the police chose to ignore it...




and to be honest.. i think things like this should be investigated... if found to be nothing than so be it.. but honeslty.. if this was my school i would be pissed if they didnt investigate...

Originally posted by mmmeat
reply to post by kattraxx

 

Why limit it to just women who have restraining orders? It would seem that the law should be enforced regardless of race, creed, culture or gender.
But that's just me, I guess...
Your pal,
Meat.

Which law do you mean?

yes an arrest does not constitute a criminal record unless their has been a conviction or guilty plea and will NOT show up on any reports that can be used against said individual. at least they are not supposed to by law.

reply to post by bigfoot1212


so in that case, then who cares if he has an arrest record? It means nothing then. Right? So why add it into the discussion? I guess it is more important that he doesn't have a criminal record wouldn't you agree?

reply to post by bigfoot1212


It most certainly does show up in Arkansas. I knew someone involved in one of those check cashing deals where he cashed a bogus money order from overseas to "help" someone. He was arrested, but it didn't take long for the police to see he was just a dupe.

A year later, when applying to rent a different apartment, he had to supply a police report, and the arrest was on the paperwork from the PD. And it did NOT state the disposition of the matter, cashing a forged instrament, though it was obvious there was no conviction.

So it will haunt you.

I'm not taking sides here, just wanted to point out a fact.

well in pa it does not as far as i know. so i guess each state has their own nuances on the matter. whether or not it is listed in the fbi database i have no idea

"Damned if they do.....Damned if they dont"

In a case such as this....our law enforcement can not win. They will never please everyone. If they had not acted as they did, and this guy shot up a bunch of people....then there would be a thread on here saying "those damn incompetent cops sat around on their arse....blah blah blah blah"


In my opinion....they did the right thing. After all the shootings going on...better safe then sorry.

Originally posted by bigfoot1212
well in pa it does not as far as i know. so i guess each state has their own nuances on the matter. whether or not it is listed in the fbi database i have no idea

It does have nuances and yes they do vary from state to state. Also therein lies the complication of what is usable or pertinent. It all depends on what the circumstances are.
For example: a person has been arrested five (5) times for burglary – but never convicted. If you were to publicly denounce him/her as a “burglar”, you could be sued for libel/slander. However, if there were a rash of burglaries in the area, and the police happened to find the aforementioned in the vicinity, that person might be reasonably be detained for questioning and have no standing to sue later. It all depends on the surrounding circumstances of the instance in question.
Remember also that District Attorneys, lawyers and police use the term “criminal record” as sort of a generic term of art. What might actually be considered a “criminal record” in common usage as opposed to used in a court of law might be a different matter entirely.

Originally posted by passenger
Let’s not get this thread diverted with some side issue of Domestic Abuse. Threatening to knock-out your spouse is entirely different than making a public threat to kill the President or blow-up a building. Both issues are treated entirely differently by the law – and well they should be.

My point had to do with the quality of the threat for which this man was arrested-- not the example I chose to illustrate that point.

Here is more information on this:

salem-news.com...

Clackamas County Sheriff's respond to threatening information by taking subject into custody on a 'police officer hold' for a mental evaluation.


(CLACKAMAS, Ore.) - A student at Clackamas Community College in Oregon City is undergoing a mental evaluation after police say he left threatening messages on his MySpace page.

College officials notified the Clackamas County Sheriff's Office that the student had been posting what are described as threatening and disturbing comments on his site.

Among the comments were these statements:

"ave maria ... this is the song that would be my soundtrack for a killing spree it just inspiers creativity."

"i dont want to think that the world is worth saving. i want to destroy it i want to take my hate for this for this world out of everybody.... I am a morbid f*ck who likes to watch things die."

"It's getting harder to not just start breaking things. It's getting harder to not just start shooting."

Responding to this alarming information, Clackamas County Sheriff's detectives say their investigation led them to consult with Clackamas County Mental Health authorities and a local Portland Mental Health facility.

As a result of this investigation and threat assessment, it was determined by all parties involved that authorities should make contact with this "subject of concern" and take him into custody without delay for a thorough mental-health evaluation.

Clackamas Sheriff's Office Spokesman Jim Strovink says this morning at 11:30 AM, 23-year old Benjamin Thomas Caldwell met peacefully with Clackamas County Sheriff's Office personnel in Clackamas. Strovink says he was discovered to be unarmed and cooperative with authorities.

"Caldwell was taken into custody by deputies peacefully, held on a Police Officer Hold, and transported to a local Portland hospital for a mental-health evaluation."

Ben Caldwell lives in Eagle Creek, Oregon. Caldwell has a prior Clackamas County arrest in 2007 for Driving Under the Influence, and has additional recorded traffic violations.

Strovink says Caldwell applied for and was issued a Concealed Handgun License in Clackamas County in July 2006.

"With respect to the current information received and the Police Officer Hold, that Concealed Handgun License has been revoked as of today's date."

"The Clackamas County Sheriff's Office wishes to recognize the swift, responsible reporting of this troubling information by Clackamas Community College officials. Their conscientious reporting may have thwarted an unfortunate future action," Strovink said.

Originally posted by kattraxx

Originally posted by passenger
Let’s not get this thread diverted with some side issue of Domestic Abuse. Threatening to knock-out your spouse is entirely different than making a public threat to kill the President or blow-up a building. Both issues are treated entirely differently by the law – and well they should be.

My point had to do with the quality of the threat for which this man was arrested-- not the example I chose to illustrate that point.

Exactly. The quality of the threat. Do you know how many thousands of Domestic Abuse complaints are filed every day? Answer: Far too many to address. That’s not to say that some of them don’t have substance but if the courts were tied up with investigating and prosecuting every spurious allegation of Domestic Abuse the system would grind to a standstill. That’s not to exonerate or defend such actions, only to show that the general level and import of such threats is not actionable.
What we have here is a public threat to public interests. That is worth investigating – especially when one considers the current atmosphere of such attacks being realized.

reply to post by passenger


well like i said an arrest without a conviction in pa is not supposed to show up on any report. i know this for a fact. and like i said whether it goes into a national database i have no idea

I'm happy with this news. It means that next time one of us Asian countries detains someone for threatening violence via the internet, the US will have to shut up lest they appear hypocritical.

The security of many outweigh the so called "rights" of a few

i]reply to post by bigfoot1212


It does show up on reports. Unfortunately, the system in Pennsylvania is so archaic that it is very common to receive a "criminal record" that contains numerous entries such as: disposition not recorded, unfilled, pending, n/a, w.t.f. (this one is a joke), etc. It is very common for expungements and overturns by higher courts to not be recorded as well. I cannot answer for the general reliability of other states but I know that in PA there has to be an "official" record search in final determination of status of various offenses. These are usually dubious as well.

I would like to get back to the original topic however and state that I, for one, do not see what the problem is for investigating deviants that can’t refrain from posting their mad plans on the internet. To rephrase what I stated before: If you wish to post on a public forum then you have to accept the possible consequences of your “speech”.

reply to post by passenger


i totally agree- if you are stupid enough to post threats you should deal with the consequences- free speech does have limits
and as for pa- i was arrested for stealing a golf cart(funny story actually) but owner refused to press charges and when you run a check on me nothing shows up in the database - not even fingerprints since they never took any. and i have a ccw permit so when i renewed it they would have said something if they knew and maybe denied me

Oh, my! Thought police! But when you think about it, they are not monitoring your thoughts, yet, but are monitoring what you say and write.

I find it curious that so many people keep talking about "what if someone wrote that, and then the school did nothing and then he/she did what that someone wrote for real"??

How to deal with this situation is a very important question I believe. And I would not be shy to answer... You cannot defend yourself against every single kind of outcome in this life. However with so many people not being able to perceive that, the first seeds that will eventually hand over total power to any government have been sewn.

No matter how hard we try, no matter what we invent or what laws we pass, they can ALWAYS be bend or broken. Life is not intended to be a perfect world. Atleast not until we stop trying to control it...
I say this well knowing that I myself could find myself in an unfortunate situation where I'll be the one to face the loss of lost ones. So be it.

The shere fact that this young mans blunt statements could lead to anyone being affraid of him says more about the persons being affraid than about the young man. I would merely take his statements as a frustrated expression that explains what he feels with an amount of exageration. Exageration often emphazises the explanation.
I can't count how many times I've said I wanted to kill someone or some president, but again I haven't done it... not because I weren't able to but because I don't have the desire to. I merely express myself overexagerated as a means to explain my frustration.

I believe misunderstandings in cases like this occur because there are more and more people who either have been raised up in an overprotected environment, ignorant to the harsh reality that world in fact is a tough place, or because they have been fearmongered into believe that such a place actually exists somewhere, or can exist.
It can NEVER exist! Never... no matter which president, minister or religion YOU support, you will never get a 100% deathfree or protected society. I even hope that will not happen, for in order for that to happen you and me will have to surrender every ounce of freedom and free thought that we have. Ironicly... even if you support a "leader" who is pro freedom, you can be damn sure that he / she at some point will try to take that freedom away from you

Remember people are different.

Another way you could ask this question... what about writers who write about killers, or killing people? Should they be hauled to justice for their sometimes exuberant details of how a person is killed or tortured?
Just because this young man hasn't been published with a book or theory of life does not mean he's not entitled to sometimes make exuberant statements. That is his right to freedom of speech!

Lastly, I wish to finish this post of with something I learned while in therapy for the loss of a friend who commited suicide.
I was for some time in anguish because this person sometimes used me as a buffer in her bad times.
She would call me and look for comfort etc. Ofcourse most extremely depressed people who have started their downward spiral are unable or do not wish to put words on their problems. So unfortunately I downplayed this when I thought about how tough a time she had.

In the end she killed herself with pills in her bathroom after having made yet another speechless call to me to which I hung up after 30-40 secs of going "hallo" and "**** are you ok?" "say something" "Ok, I'm going to hang up... call again if you want to talk, ok?"

After some time in sessions, the therapist told me some words that have stuck to me ever since...:

You can NEVER be responsible for what someone else has done.

You in this case can be exchanged with: the school, the police, the parents of the killer, the friends...

[edit on 17/2/08 by flice]