News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
How do you come to this conclusion? Comment below you got it right. He tried to drug them, they found out, he tried to save face. Him approaching the officer first does not indicate his innocence.
Why would he choose those drugs if he was trying to drug them? They're stimulants.
They're... drugs. So yes, he (intended) to drug them. Who gives a fuck what the exact composition is?
These illegal stimulants could have harmed and even killed them. He put them in their ice cream, neither they nor their parents were aware and didn't consent to consuming the pills. Even if he intended to "catch" it, a million different things could have prevented that. He gambled with those girls' lives to create a fake political enemy. If he had done that to my kids, I would have had to resist retaliating against him, and I'm not even a parent!
I'm asking for his motive. I believe he put the pills in there because he wanted to make a scene about it. Not because he wanted them to ingest them. The article doesn't state how this was done, did the children ever possess the ice cream while it was contaminated? Or did he take them, plant the drugs, and head for the counter?
Either way he should have the book thrown at him for this and if there's more information out there and I'm wrong, fine but I just don't see how speculating that he intended to drug them makes sense given the facts presented in the article.
It happened. Unless the reporters received wrong information (which happens), he absolutely committed the crime, which is a felony. So no, he wasn't just "making a scene", and his intent doesn't matter, because again, those drugs could have still ended harming those children.
But I did edit my comment to clarify that he attempted to drug them, or at least there was the risk of that happening accidentally...
I read the article. Nothing about those quotes makes it clear that the ice cream was in possession of the girls after he drugged it. He could have given it to them or ordered it for them, making it "theirs", then taken it back to add the pills and make his scene. If he wanted to drug them why not just let them eat it? And why those drugs that don't produce any of the typical effects someone would want to drug someone for?
@lightnsfw@reddthat.com is making sense here. Throw the book at him and maybe have a psych eval done. Republican, so might as well check his computer for child porn.
That being said, spiking a kids ice cream with ecstasy pills makes no sense. It tastes awful, they would be hard to chew and an obvious foreign object in ice cream. If the girls didn't OD, they'd be bouncing off the walls.
I could see someone that doesn't actually know anything about drugs thinking this is a good way to frame someone. In reality, Drugs Are Really Expensive, as well as MDMA users/dealers generally not being willing to hurt children for nothing.