Balous avatar Animals & Nature
Share
5 19

Here is the gif that was sent. If you are prone to epileptic seizures, I would not click on this.
http://www.burned.org/gallery/m...serialNumber=4

According to the article it seems the person they've arrested had shown intent, as well as perhaps a motive. Sending a GIF designed to trigger epileptic seizures to a man you know suffers from epilepsy is not okay.

I'm interested in hearing what the court has to say.

I suppose their gonna need to prove intent as well. Sending GIF's is pretty innocuous. Criminals are a crafty bunch.

This user has deactivated their account.
@2527754

Thanks for the additional information. I was unable to see the offending GIF - the website is blocked by my server and that detail was omitted from the story. The built in message seems to pretty well establish intent.

This user has deactivated their account.
@2527254

I'm not sure I agree. If a man goes to a gun store and buys a gun with the intent to shoot and kill someone, is the gun store at fault?

This user has deactivated their account.
@2527283

That's true. I've noticed that Facebook is a helluva lot more strict on what users can post than on Twitter. There is porn all over Twitter, but you don't see that on Facebook.

From what I've seen on Kurt Eichenwald's Twitter feed, he seems like a thoroughly unsavory character who routinely provokes people, but sending him a gif designed to trigger a seizure seems like a form of assault to me, and it was clearly intentional. I'm not sure what sort of punishment Rivello should face, but as a matter of public safety I don't think it would be a good idea to allow people to get away with doing what he did. There are 40 others who did the same thing, so fairness demands they face the same punishment.

If there was intent to harm then **** yeah anyone should be arrested.

In most case where a person's intent is to harm... and then they do harm... they should be arrested.

Because if there is intent, does it really matter how the harm is committed?
The fact is they willingly and purposely went out of their want to harm another person.

I say most, because there are probably some items (such as self defense or protecting others in the moment) that maybe shouldn't be...

IF it's true that he was purposely trying to harm Eichenwald, that's assault no matter the weapon.

This user has been banned.
This user has deactivated their account.
@2527752

I'm not a Trump supporter, but that is bullshit!

Anonymous