
Was ‘Australi Witness’ a troll or a terrorist? - temp
https://features.wearemel.com/how-to-prosecute-an-internet-troll-827e29c621c5
======
mirimir
> When Potaka and Thorne compared notes, they discovered that their respective
> Facebook impostors only had one friend: Joshua Goldberg.

Seriously? He could have been that stupid? While posing as an ISIS supporter?

~~~
justinjlynn
All OpSec failures have a propensity to look rather stupid in retrospect --
though this is a particularly egregious example of contamination.

------
a_bonobo
>His psychiatric evaluation, released through a Freedom of Information Act
request filed by several news organizations, describes him as suffering from
“grandiosity” and “delusions of persecution.”

That describes every troll in the entire Internet.

~~~
GunboatDiplomat
Wait, how are we defining trolling? I'd say this kid went above and beyond
what would be "trolling." Trolling is trying to get a rise out of people on a
discussion board or twitter or similar. Trolling is not encouraging terrorists
to bomb American cities.

~~~
ryanlol
>Trolling is not encouraging terrorists to bomb American cities.

Really depends on if he would have alerted LE or not, which we can't know as
he was arrested so early on. (Which TBH, considering the FBIs formidable
surveillance capabilities seems a little sketchy.)

Obviously, if such an attack actually went through he'd be no better than the
attackers themselves.

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
> Really depends on if he would have alerted LE or not

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment)

------
ikeboy
Earlier HN discussion when he was first arrested:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10211693](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10211693)

------
mattmanser
You can bet the FBI have added this to their list of 'foiled' attacks, even
though there was never any chance of anything happening.

I bet your president was briefed of an imminent attack on Kansas as if it was
about to happen too.

------
ryanlol
I have to admit I haven't had time to pull up the case on PACER yet, but it
seems to be like the FBIs actions might have been a little too hasty here.

Based on what I've read so far, it seems like the FBIs actions might have been
a bit too hasty here. I believe that instead of arresting this person, they
should have placed him under heavy surveillance and then attempted to first
deduce if he in fact intended to alert LE to the attack or not.

Arresting him several days before the supposed attack was supposed to happen
took away his chance to essentially absolve himself by reporting the planned
"attacks" to law enforcement and therefore exposing a domestic terrorist
(cell).

~~~
tptacek
When you read accounts of what happened here, try to remember that the
"confidential informant" the FBI used has pretty much exactly one task: to get
the suspect to say exactly the set of things they need to say to make a solid
case. The clock wasn't ticking here. The FBI had on its side the element of
surprise, the initiative, and the clock. They got to wait until their CI did
its job.

Presumably, if this person is indicted, it's going to be pretty bad.

