Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What we know about CEO shooting suspect

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 1001 posts

Re: What we know about CEO shooting suspect

#331

Post by Starlevel004 »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #282
breadwinner wrote: post #156

He gave the Unabomber’s manifesto four stars on Goodreads, and described Unabomber as a "political revolutionary". Excerpts from his review: "It’s easy to quickly and thoughtless write this off as the manifesto of a lunatic, in order to avoid facing some of the uncomfortable problems it identifies. But it’s simply impossible to ignore how prescient many of his predictions about modern society turned out." "He was a v…

The unabomber made some good points though. First quote is solid analysis of him

The manfiesto is a 1960s screed about SJWs. You might as well just read a Neo-Twitter thread and get the exact same experience.

Re: What we know about CEO shooting suspect

#332

Post by gexla »

lawlessone wrote: post #12

>Police revealed that finding the 26-year-old was a complete surprise, and that they did not have his name on a list of suspects prior to today So when they said they knew who he was yesterday it was a lie.

They weren't lying, but it was the wrong thing to say. They had a list of suspects and they may have had high confidence that one of them was their guy. But they couldn't know that at least until they took someone into custody.

Re: What we know about CEO shooting suspect

#334

Post by lazyasciiart »

shiroiushi wrote: post #222
impish9208 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His followers count keeps going up every time I refresh. It’s not like he’ll be pushing commits for a while haha.

It's too bad: they really should give prisoners like this computers with some limited access so they can work on coding projects. What else are they going to do with their time, after all? Perhaps they could spend it contributing to open-source projects and helping society.

They could try teaching other inmates, or becoming the jailhouse lawyer.

Re: What we know about CEO shooting suspect

#336

Post by HaZeust »

GuardianCaveman wrote: post #309
sfryxell wrote: post #287

Maaaan, The NYPD will take credit for oxygen. Right now their talking like they solved it. a "combination of old-school detective work and new age technology" it was an employee at McDonalds. McDonalds solved this crime. Like god intended.

It was actually a patron at McDonalds.

That's gotta be the cover-up so they can quickly so, "oh! It was an anonymous tip. No one to blame or possibly endanger for you crazed vigilantes--sorry, thanks!"

I firmly believe it was an employee.

Re: What we know about CEO shooting suspect

#338

Post by lgrapenthin »

breadwinner wrote: post #44

He was carrying all of the evidence with him, including the fake ID he used at the hostel, the gun & suppressor, mask, and even a handwritten manifesto that points to his motivation. It seems he wanted to be found.

Could as well have walked into a police station or uploaded the manifesto on his GitHub.

Re: What we know about CEO shooting suspect

#339

Post by EdwardDiego »

cpill wrote: post #201
qzw wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly my thoughts as well. Every piece of evidence law enforcement has was basically intentionally provided by him. If he just stuffed his trash in one of his 7 pockets, or wore a pair of sunglasses, or didn't actually stare straight at the camera in the taxi like he was getting his school picture taken? I mean pretty much the only thing he failed to do was leave his business card at the crime scene.

I guess the next one can learn from this one and they will iteratively get better at not getting caught.

I look forward to the retro on this.

Re: What we know about CEO shooting suspect

#340

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

HaZeust wrote: post #336
GuardianCaveman wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was actually a patron at McDonalds.

That's gotta be the cover-up so they can quickly so, "oh! It was an anonymous tip. No one to blame or possibly endanger for you crazed vigilantes--sorry, thanks!" I firmly believe it was an employee.

I feel like when you start conspiracy theorizing you're obligated to follow it to its logical conclusion. If I thought it were a cover-up to protect the store from crazed vigilantes, the last thing I'd do is try and put the store back in danger!
Post reply on HN