back to article Creep travels half the world to harass online teen gamer… and gets shot by her mom – cops

A New Zealand gamer who flew halfway around the world to confront a 14-year-old girl he met online got more than he bargained for when her mom shot him, according to police. Troy George Skinner, 25, flew from his home in Auckland to Sydney, Australia, took a connecting flight to Los Angeles, USA, then from Los Angeles to …

Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

When I'm logging, I often have a firearm (or three, occasionally) close to hand. Dinner lives in the woods, you know.

8
1
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

"It takes a hell of a lot of bullets to chop down a douglas fir!"

That would depend on the size of the bullets. It would definitely take more than one, but probably less than 5 or 10 .50 cal rounds.

4
1
Silver badge

At Pen-y-gors, re: bullets & trees.

It only takes one bullet to bring down any tree that isn't petrified. The round just needs to be an armor piercing high explosive one & you can kiss that tree goodbye. If you acknowledge that the round from a Howitzer is a bullet writ large, then it doesn't have to be an APHE one, it just has to hit the tree a glancing blow to reduce it to splinters.

Granted, LRR probably wasn't armed with a Howitzer, but that's only because they're too hard to fit in your knickers.

"Is that a 120mm cannon in your pants, or are you just REALLY happy to see me?"

*Cough*

=-Jp

8
4
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

"To be fair, firearms didn't exist when the fairy tale of LRRH originated"

I'm not sure when it did originate (although they existed when the Brothers Grimm wrote it up) but before firearms there were bows and arrows to which firearms were the successor.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

On my family's property, there is a fir tree that we have been pinning targets on for nearly 140 years. It probably has nearly a ton of lead in it. Over 60 of those many shots were from my Barrett .50, and another couple dozen from the .416 that I traded for it. The fir tree is thriving.

10
1
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

and I'll go out on a limb and suggest that if they did, the woodsman would have been armed with one.

Colt made a nifty .22 target pistol called the 'Woodsman'. Quite an accurate and discreet pistol, especially if fitted with a supressor. So "Would be woodsman felled by woman's Woodsman".

But joking aside, it must have been a terrifying experience for the women. The attacker must have been pretty deranged and determined to travel all that way, and based on his behaviour and what he was carrying, his intentions didn't look good. Self-defence seemed quite justified and demonstrate why firearms can be a good thing, especially if home invasions are fairly common, and police response times can be quite long.

9
0
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

Bows & arrows aren't handy when cutting timber. Nor do they work well in even light brush. My old Kimber fits the bill, though.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

I'm not sure when it did originate

10th century, according to various sources - it is originally of French / Norman origin, long before the Grimms happened upon it.

For context, the Chinese were just beginning to use fire lances at the start of the 11th century.

The Battle of Agincourt, which was notable for the mass use of the longbow as a decisive weapon, wasn't until 1415, (15th century) and the first hand-held firearms appeared in Europe a decade or two later.

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

"LRRH kept her pistol in her knickers."

You'd expect nothing less from the daughter of Robbing Hood.

5
0

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

Somebody managed to cut down a tree with one of his "toys":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KEz355keJ0

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

"It takes a hell of a lot of bullets to chop down a douglas fir!"

That would depend on the size of the bullets. It would definitely take more than one, but probably less than 5 or 10 .50 cal rounds.

Didn't "Mythbusters" bust this one?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

"The Battle of Agincourt, which was notable for the mass use of the longbow as a decisive weapon, wasn't until 1415, (15th century)"

Petite tranchet arrowheads go back to the Mesolithic which was a few thousand years beyond the C15th.

2
0
Silver badge
Windows

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

Some folks just don't understand a tree with a 12' diameter trunk base.

I do however recall cutting down a 4 or 5 year old maple with an uzi 9mm 40 round clip once. A loooooong time ago.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

Petite tranchet arrowheads go back to the Mesolithic which was a few thousand years beyond the C15th.

Oh yes of course, I wasn't trying to suggest that the bow and arrow were a new idea in the 15th Century, rather that they were still considered a decisive weapon at that point.

It wasn't until the late 15th that firearms were starting to be used on battlefields in Europe, and of course initially only as bloody big cannon, not hand-weapons.

3
0
Bronze badge
Happy

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

"It takes a hell of a lot of bullets to chop down a douglas fir!"

True, but that just makes it that much more fun to try! Don't ask me how I know, I just do, OK??

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

When I'm logging, I often have a firearm (or three, occasionally) close to hand. Dinner lives in the woods, you know.

Not to mention critters that would like to have you as the main course for dinner.

3
0
Bronze badge
Joke

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

Mythbusters tried that; they used a M134 Minigun, and while it worked, it took far longer than a chainsaw or axe, and made a mess as well. (along with chewing up a good deal of ammunition)

A better choice would have been a GAU-8 Avenger.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

I think he is more likely to end up with tattoos indicating that he is someone else's prison bitch.

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

JohnG, prison rape is nothing to make fun of. Rape is rape. There are absolutely no extenuating circumstances that makes it OK.

5
1
Holmes

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

The Colt Woodsman has been involved in one murder in the UK (1981).

https://shootersunion.com.au/the-folly-of-gun-registration-part-1/

0
0

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

Burning match (fuse) firearms were first recorded being used in 1364 (according to PBS)

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Now he can get a tattoo, "Shot by the Mom!"

1364? Try 1288 (and probably earlier).

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Mistake...

Biggest and most costly mistake this chap likely made is not having health/travel insurance for his injuries in the good ol' US of A...

35
3
Facepalm

Re: Mistake...

Pretty sure any insurance policy he could have procured would have a lovely "...not involved in criminal pursuits..." exclusion.

2
0

Psycho creeps will always be with us.

>>the mother – who had no idea of her daughter's online interactions

And there, just there- that's most of the problem.

Not wanting to go all DM here, but in the UK the mom would probably have been arrested.

15
20
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

"Not wanting to go all DM here, but in the UK the mom would probably have been arrested."

Yes, she would for initial investigations. But as he was shot facing her, it'd be self defence and she'd be let off.

16
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

yeah, in the UK she'd be let off, having her dna taken (for ever), and being put on God-knows-how-many databases, no doubt.

13
2

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

Giving my age away here, I thought DM meant Dungeon Master (from a game for anyone who thinks it might relate to a predilection for whips, chains, etc) and it took me a second to realise that you meant a disreputable publication.

13
1
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

arrested?

well, yeah. -- every occurrence of gun use is investigated as we do not have a habit of gun ownership.

And I don't think you understand the chain of detention rules, either.

10
2
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

Shooting people in the UK is actually seen as a serious matter.

Or were you not aware of that?

13
3
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

Yes, she would for initial investigations. But as he was shot facing her, it'd be self defence and she'd be let off.

Really? Going on recent history in the UK, she'd more likely have been convicted of illegal possession of a firearm, attempted manslaughter, and parental neglect...

16
8
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

and parental neglect...

Nice that it would be for parents oblivious to the online interactions of wayward progeny to finally get a demonstrable repercussion, I doubt neglect would ever be laid or even pursued.

If only as it's too good a base excuse for internet clamp-downs in the name of 'protecting children'. Now if only there was a chance children could be caught up in a war zone they'd do their utmost to cut that out too....wait, what? they are???? And they're not doing much about it????

5
0
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

Yes, she would for initial investigations

Which is the crux of the problem. People defending their families in their own homes should not be subject to arrest. Arrest for anything ever invalidates things like the USA visa waiver elligibility, and that very much does mess with your employment opportunities - at least in the City.

The visa waiver is used covertly as a proxy for not being a criminal, given the impossibility of determining if the person applying for the job is hiding behind the rehab of offenders act when completing the declaration of offences section. Whether it should or shouldn't is irrelevant - it is, and defending your family at home should not compromise your career opportunities.

6
5
Silver badge

@Alister

"Really? Going on recent history in the UK, she'd more likely have been convicted of illegal possession of a firearm, attempted manslaughter, and parental neglect..."

Don't be a clown.

You're allowed to own a firearm in the UK, either a shotgun or a rifle. You have to be a member of a shooting club to get the license, and the license gets renewed every two years (I think).

The Karl Bridgwater case did a lot to nail down the responsibilities of gun owners and home owners. In that case, as you might remember, the farmer said he shot Karl in self defence. However, the prosecution reasoned that Karl was shot in the back, so he was running away. If he's running away, then there is no longer an immediate threat to life to the home owner. So the farmer in this case (as far as I'm concerned) was wrong to shoot him. If Karl had attacked him with a crowbar then it's self defence. Otherwise it isn't.

Even as recently as a few months ago when the pensioner stabbed the burglar. He was arrested and investigated because, thankfully, no one can just claim self defence when it was a pre-mediated murder.

So away with you to the Daily Fail website!

10
8
Anonymous Coward

Re: arrested for protecting your kids

> Shooting people in the UK is actually seen as a serious matter.

OK if she'd hit him with her umbrella which she kept by the door for use on rainy days.

Or even if she'd struggled with him while he was holding his knife, managed to get it off him and he ended up cutting himself in the process, they still have arrested the mother.

7
0
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

"Shooting people in the UK is actually seen as a serious matter."

Breaking into an occupied dwelling with the intent to do harm to a child, or anybody else, is a serious matter anywhere on the planet.

Or were you not aware of that?

18
3
Silver badge

Re: @Alister

@wolftone

I forgot, sarcasm doesn't get across very well on El Reg unless you add /sarc...

1
5
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

"in the UK the mom would probably have been arrested."

I don't know why you got the down votes as this is what happens.

I've known it happen when an elderly couple in a remote cottage in S Down or S Armagh were being attacked. It took a little while for the police to get someone senior enough to countermand it (a gold course was mentioned). The SOCO who attended the PM told me there no brains in the carnial cavity but he wasn't sure there'd been any originally.

7
0
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

"Not wanting to go all DM here, but in the UK the mom would probably have been arrested."

Well, yes. Anyone firing a weapon in the UK will be arrested. First, arrested is not charged, it is done because there is clearly reasonable suspicion of a crime being committed. Second, it is highly like that this was a handgun, which are more or less completely illegal to own. So whether she would be charged for the shooting, she would definitely be charged, found guilty, and sentenced to 5-10 years in jail for possession of an illegal firearm.

8
3
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

People defending their families in their own homes should not be subject to arrest. Arrest for anything ever invalidates things like the USA visa waiver elligibility, and that very much does mess with your employment opportunities - at least in the City.

That comes down to the fuckwitts of America not being able to understand that arrest is not the same as being charged nor the same as being convicted.

America's stupidity is not a good reason to change our perfectly good due process procedures. It is however one of many good reasons to think about wanting to go there.

12
8

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

UK has a concept of reasonable force. In this case you have a man trying to break into a house with known occupants inside of it, it is reasonable in these circumstances to believe that he intends harm to the occupants, potentially lethally so. So while the Mother might be initially arrested in the UK, she'd be let go once the evidence gathered showed the legitimacy of her actions.

4
0
Silver badge

Re: arrested for protecting your kids

"OK if she'd hit him with her umbrella which she kept by the door for use on rainy days."

Or cricket bat and suspiciously sharpened stumps. (as suggested by a local copper)

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

"People defending their families in their own homes should not be subject to arrest."

Until sufficient facts have been established by investigation the reason for the shooting is unknown. So are you saying that someone who has shot a person for reasons not yet established should be allowed to go free and possibly take themselves off from the scene on the basis that subsequent investigation might establish a self defence motive?

4
4
Silver badge

Re: @Alister

Wolfetone, have you been on the pop?

"The Karl Bridgwater case did a lot to nail down the responsibilities of gun owners and home owners. In that case, as you might remember, the farmer said he shot Karl in self defence. "

You're confusing the case of Carl Bridgewater who was murdered in 1978, with the separate case of Tony Martin, who shot a burglar in the back in 1999.

7
0

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

>That comes down to the fuckwitts of America not being able to

>understand that arrest is not the same as being charged

Because in America, an warrantless arrest only takes place after the police have decided at least the first thing they will be charging you with.

You can be detained ("seized") for an investigation, or the safety of the officers or others. That might look like an arrest, with the person placed in hand cuffs and all that -- for a brief amount of time and, except for extenuating circumstances, kept at the scene until a decision is made to charge or release.

That may become protective custody, that may become an arrest, that may become take the handcuffs off and tell them to have a nice day.

Per the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1968 Terry decision,

"It is quite plain that the Fourth Amendment governs "seizures" of the person which do not eventuate in a trip to the station house and prosecution for crime-"arrests" in traditional terminology."

If you're arrested in the U.S. without a warrant the police have already reached the point they will be charging you a crime.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

America's stupidity is not a good reason to change our perfectly good due process procedures.

The problem is that they're not perfectly good. I get a trashed career because some scrote fancied my telly and had a pop at my family for having the temerity to be watching it when broke in? Perfectly good, it ain't.

It is however one of many good reasons to think about wanting to go there.

I go where my employer needs to send me. They need me in Asia, I go to Asia, they need me in North America, guess what? I go.

2
1
Silver badge

Re: Psycho creeps will always be with us.

Until sufficient facts have been established by investigation the reason for the shooting is unknown. So are you saying that someone who has shot a person for reasons not yet established should be allowed to go free and possibly take themselves off from the scene on the basis that subsequent investigation might establish a self defence motive?

If I'm in my home, then you pretty much know where I live and where you can find me later, should a need arise. I even have a job to pay for the damn thing, so you know where to find me during a work day too.

Someone attacked in their own home who simply states "My home was attacked by an unknown intruder" should be assumed to be telling the truth and unless any evidence gathered from the scene / witnesses directly contradicts that statement then that should be the end of the matter.

If the injured party claims to have been invited around, they'd know the names of all the family members, dob's or career/job roles etc. They'd know something. Some scumbag burglar/rapist/murderer won't know enough details to convince anyone they had a legiitmate reason to be there and were otherwise attacked.

4
1
Silver badge

Great outcome, but what about over here?

The thing that concerns me, is that if I were away from home, my wife & kids would have no chance against this guy. He's simply too big for them to fight. A kitchen full of knives probably won't help my wife much, even when her protecting the kids instincts kick in.

6
2
Silver badge

Re: Great outcome, but what about over here?

"my wife & kids would have no chance against this guy."

I dunno, he doesn't seem especially smart. They could probably outwit him :)

I'm a little more confused by the home security of having a gun but not having doors that can survive a brick being tossed at them. If that chap had tried that trick on my downstairs windows/door then the breeze block would have bounced back at him.

If you are genuinely concerned about your families safety, then get a big dog. Can't be turned against you, generally attracts less hassle and is much more effective against those who are a bit mental.

10
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: Great outcome, but what about over here?

Dogs can be turned against you, theoretically, but, more worryingly, sometimes they quite spontaneously kill children.

It's very unusual for a dog to be turned against its owner but there was an amusing case in the UK of a criminal who was very experienced with dogs successfully getting a police dog to attack a police officer.

8
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018