Cops Battered A Man Suffering A Seizure, Cooked Up Criminal Charges To Cover Up Their Actions

from the fuck-em-up-and-then-fuck-em-up-some-more dept

It often seems that anything not immediately comprehensible to a law enforcement officer must be responded to with violence. Sure, we get to hear plenty about officers’ “training and expertise,” but the tool set seems extremely limited when it comes to dealing with unforeseen circumstances.

Whatever can’t be handled with a gun can probably be handled with a Taser and a bit of a beating. Already a problematic workflow, but it gets even worse when cops are asked to be first responders for calls better handled by EMTs or mental health care specialists.

Because we ask cops to do jobs they’re not trained to do, we end up with the sort of thing far too often. But these cops are far from blameless. They didn’t have to respond the way they did to a medical emergency. And they sure as shit didn’t need to follow up their initial mistake with something far, far more nefarious.

It starts out badly enough. It gets a lot more horrible from there.

In the early hours of Aug. 29, 2022, San Anselmo resident Alice Frankel awoke to strange noises coming from the man who was then her fiance and is now her husband. When she turned on a light, she said, Bruce Frankel’s arms were stiffly extended, his legs were shaking, his eyes were rolled back and his mouth foamed. 

She called 911, worried he was dying. A neurologist would later diagnose Bruce Frankel with epilepsy and say he had suffered a grand mal seizure. 

People think calling 911 will get them the best help the fastest. That’s not always the case. Sometimes, you just get the first people who show up, and who aren’t the best fit for the situation.

That was the case here. The first person on the scene was Officer Kevin Sinnott of the Central Marin Police Authority (CMPA). Dispatchers had told Officer Sinnott that 62-year-old Bruce Frankel was in “an altered state.” Frankel, who had already stumbled in the bathroom and cut his back open, continued to struggle through his seizure. Officer Sinnott tried to restrain Frankel. Frankel “resisted,” so to speak. He did not comply because it was impossible for him to comply.

All of this was captured on the officer’s body camera.

The struggle went on for several minutes before the officer shocked Bruce Frankel twice with a Taser, the video shows. After more officers and EMTs arrived, and Bruce Frankel was finally handcuffed and taken away in an ambulance, he was bloodied and had injuries to both arms and a cut across his nose, his lawsuit states.

Now, at this point, everything is just extremely unfortunate. An officer who didn’t recognize what he was dealing with and was untrained to handle someone suffering through a tonic-clonic seizure responded like any cop would: he deployed force until he had control of the situation. In this case, securing control likely occurred as soon as the seizure ended.

And it would have just remained an unfortunate occurrence, albeit one that might indicate calls requiring medical attention be handled by actual medical professionals, rather than some guy with a Taser and the ability to yell “stop resisting” over and over again until the words lose their meaning.

It’s what happened after this that shocks the conscience, which has not only the expected definition but a legal definition when it comes to civil rights lawsuits.

At 3:26 a.m., Sinnott spoke to a fellow officer, Sean Fahy, about whether a crime occurred. After Fahy said, “There’s nothing criminal here,” Sinnott said, “I don’t think he’s competent to commit a crime.”

But two minutes later, Sinnott spoke to officer Joel Heaps, a CMPA corporal who later identified himself as a supervising officer on the case. Heaps asked if Bruce Frankel committed “243(b),” a battery on a police officer. Sinnott said no. Seconds later, Heaps asked, “Was there any 240?” referring to an attempted assault, and Sinnott said yes.

Three minutes later, Heaps said, “I understand this is a medical, but at the point that he starts fighting our uniformed officers, there’s a 240 or 243(b).” Sinnott then said, “I felt like I got battered.”

This could have been handled with an apology and an honest effort to make sure Frankel received the proper medical attention. Instead, an officer who screwed up his response decided to turn Frankel into a criminal with the assistance of his supervisor. Officer Sinnott capped it all off by filing a report stating that he had detained Frankel for being the perpetrator of a “possible domestic battery” and was “under the influence of alcohol or drugs.”

None of this was true but it was enough to get Frankel handcuffed to a hospital bed after Officer Sinnott repeated his lies to hospital staff, claiming there had been a “pretty big scuffle” and that Frankel was under arrest for a bunch of imagined crimes.

Five hours later — and after Officer Heaps insinuated Frankel had attacked Officer Sinnott — Frankel was discharged from the hospital and taken to jail. They processed Frankel for the (made up) charges and cut him loose. Basically, the cops just abandoned Frankel, who was still wearing his hospital garb.

In his paper hospital clothing, Bruce Frankel walked several blocks — with no money or cellphone — to Northgate Gas, where an attendant helped him call a taxi home, he said. In the taxi home, he said, “All I could think about was how and what I was going to tell my friends and colleagues.” 

At this point, Frankel still believed he had assaulted an officer while suffering through his seizure. It wasn’t until the Marin County DA’s office called Frankel’s wife to offer its support for her as a “victim of domestic violence” that the Frankels became aware of the extent of the charges manufactured against Bruce. Once the DA’s office had a chance to view the recordings of the arrest, it withdrew the charges with prejudice. It helps but it’s too late. Now, the county has a lawsuit [PDF] to deal with.

Let’s hope justice is swift. Even if a court can find some way to condone the use of force against a person in the throes of a tonic-clonic seizure, there’s no way a court can condone the manufacturing of criminal charges in an attempt to cover up an officer’s actions. And if cops in Marin County are doing this sort of thing while being recorded by their own cameras, there’s every reason to believe this isn’t the first time they’ve done this, nor is it the sort of thing they’re uncomfortable doing.

Filed Under: , , , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Cops Battered A Man Suffering A Seizure, Cooked Up Criminal Charges To Cover Up Their Actions”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
104 Comments

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Do any of hd loved ones have money?

If they do they can hire some dark web hackers to take down the police departments computer network and cost them a big repair bill.

Financial harm is far more effectuve and far more preferable to murder

And have the DA’s computer network hosed as well so they cannot do their work

If they can’t prepare their case they can’t go to trial

Money talks, bs walks

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Advocating lawless action is not good.

Also, you’re advocating attacking the police station infrastructure, which does nothing to the individuals.

The civil suit is by far the superior option. You target the people responsible for the actions, and bureaucratic organizations responsible for the culture allowing the actions.

… And it is legal.

Also, you don’t have to worry about subcontractors turning on you.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Thankfully, the Real World has shades of gray and isn’t binary “all government causes harm” vs “all government is good”.

There’s a reason we have civil court, and this is it. If society at large decides to abandon civil court in preference of vigilanteism, THEN your argument makes sense. But we’re not there yet; we’re just way better informed about the bad apples than we were 30 years ago.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

If you have money you can do anything

You can at least prevent conviction on whatever criminal charges are coookrd up

Using dark web and crypto they will never be able to trace it,if it comes a wallet on a hard disk and not an exchange

And remember, you can always wipe your hard disk where even the best forensics software will get nothing

No evidence = no CASE

As it was company policy withy online radio station to wipe all station owned equipment before traveling abroad we broke no laws in any of the more than 200 countries and territories when we did this

There is no criminal statute anywhere in the world that made it a crime to wipe our equipment and resintall before travelling internationally

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Would that be… none at all?

The officer appeared to try to do the right thing, only to be coached into covering it up by his supervisor. That covering up resulted in yet further mistreatment of the victim that didn’t include any torture cages, but did include being handcuffed to a hospital bed and being taken to a police station and abandoned there after the fact.

So maybe we handcuff the officer and his supervisor to hospital beds and then drop them off at a different precinct in hospital gowns as justice? After smacking them around a bit?

OR… we sue them in civil court.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

“Cops Battered A Man Suffering A Seizure, Cooked Up Criminal Charges To Cover Up Their Actions”

…And then this blogger wrote about it, b/c it’s more grist for his mill of anti-police hate speech.

Notice how there’s never any reporting on this site about the brave law enforcement officers who regularly go above and beyond the call of duty in protecting productive citizens’ property? 🤔

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

is there a major difference in taste when it comes to shoe-polish

Right, because asking why this site doesn’t dedicate coverage of exceptional police heroism similar to their enthusiastic and unrelenting blogging about instances where law enforcement mightn’t’ve met the highest standards of a productive, civilized, safe, low-crime, high-trust society is “boot-licking.” 🙄

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

It’s a little principle called “that’s what the cops should be doing”.

Society in general expects the police to protect and serve the people, not to abuse the power and authority given to them by the people for self-serving ends. When some cops abuse that power and authority, society expects those cops to be held accountable for that abuse. That we live in a society where neither expectation is a consistent reality shows how bootlickers are more than willing to excuse any abuse of power by the police in the name of “safety”⁠—even when that abuse results in, say, the beating of a man going through a seizure or the extrajudicial execution of a man who was only suspected of using a fake $20 at a convenience store.

Yes, plenty of cops do their job without abusing their power. Yes, sometimes mistakes happen in the course of that job. But that doesn’t give cops the automatic right to escape all accountability for those mistakes⁠—especially in cases like this one, where the mistake was compounded by a cover-up that included falsely charging the victim of a police beating with a crime.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

Ironically, those bootlickers insisting we should just look away are part of what keeps meaningful reforms from happening. The increasing obviousness only serves to further polarize the public against the police in general.

The more the bootlickers pretend nothing is wrong, the more people realize how deep the rot goes.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

Yup. Letting cops escape accountability only ever sends the message that anything they do is okay to keep doing. (Hint hint, Fifth Circuit.) Society (and the legal system) have the power to improve this situation, but only by holding cops to higher standards and enforcing accountability (civil and/or criminal) when the cops violate those standards. Otherwise, the cops will become⁠—and in some cases, basically already are⁠—a street gang that happens to have legal sanction for committing wanton violence.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5

Legally? Yes, that would be nice. Morally and socially? No, I meant “higher”.

The police receive a lot of power and privilege to do their jobs; in return, society expects the police to exercise restraint in its usage of that power and privilege, especially since said usage could result in people dying. Society wants police behavior held to a higher standard precisely because even a small exertion of power can damage someone’s life⁠—and because the police have government approval to inflict that power upon people with fewer actual legal limits on its usage. A cop is legally allowed to beat a person into submission if they resist arrest or they pose a threat to public safety; neither you nor I would be legally allowed to beat a person for any reason other than “defense of self or others”. That reality is why society wants cops held to a higher standard⁠—morally, if not legally⁠—and that starts with greater accountability for their actions.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

It’s a little principle called “that’s what the cops should be doing”.

Which is why, autist, I specifically questioned the lack of coverage of heroic police officers who go above and beyond the call of duty in protecting productive citizens’ property.

I didn’t know autism hindered reading comprehension, too!! 😮

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

I specifically questioned the lack of coverage of heroic police officers who go above and beyond the call of duty in protecting productive citizens’ property.

Again: Society expects police to act with higher standards than the average person, so stories of “heroic police officers” would ideally be the norm instead of the exception. Stories of officers who go above-and-beyond even that standard are worth noting. That said: Such stories shouldn’t push the stories of bad policing and corrupt cops out of the spotlight or treat such stories as aberrations or one-offs that have no effect on policing as an institution.

As for Techdirt, it focuses on stories of police malfeasance precisely because those stories are evidence of an institution in need of reform. These stories keep popping up because the institution hasn’t yet been reformed. Anyone who doesn’t want to read such stories on this site has three options: Stop reading those articles (or this site in general), support institutional reforms, or support the creation of a police state where even the mildest criticism of the police can and will result in state-sanctioned violence against the critic.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:7

And even if Techdirt has never run articles like that AC is asking for: Techdirt has no obligation or responsibility to run “cops are awesome” articles.

I think we can all agree, however, that TD should strive for balanced coverage.

It’s not an exaggeration for a reader to state that the site’s coverage of law enforcement is exclusively negative. That indicates a clear and compromising bias.

It would be like if the only reporting on Elon Musk and Ex-Twitter here was negative, even when he does good things like challenge the censorship regime in Brazil.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:8

I think we can all agree, however, that TD should strive for balanced coverage.

No, “we all” don’t agree with that.

It’s not an exaggeration for a reader to state that the site’s coverage of law enforcement is exclusively negative.

And the best way to remedy that is for law enforcement to actually behave like a law enforcement and there wouldn’t be anything negative to write about, simple huh?

That indicates a clear and compromising bias.

Everyone is biased, calling it “compromising” is your opinion because you can’t stand people pointing out that a lot of cops are better suited to shoveling manure at best.

It would be like if the only reporting on Elon Musk and Ex-Twitter here was negative, even when he does good things like challenge the censorship regime in Brazil.

No, because we expect cops to be held to a higher standard and we don’t expect a billionaire hypocrite to have any standards at all except those he sets for himself as evidenced by how inconsistent and mercurial he is in his decisions like happily taking down content at the behest of a lot of countries except Brazil.

That you don’t get that is quite telling.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:8

I think we can all agree, however, that TD should strive for balanced coverage.

No, we can’t. Techdirt is an opinion blog; it is free to present as biased an opinion of policing as it wishes.

It’s not an exaggeration for a reader to state that the site’s coverage of law enforcement is exclusively negative. That indicates a clear and compromising bias.

Asking the site to run more “cops are awesome” stories also indicates a clear and compromising bias. That bias, however, would seek to drown out the stories Techdirt runs about police misconduct. Those stories help highlight such misconduct and push for greater accountability for the institution of policing and for individual officers. To drown such stories in a deluge of “cops are awesome” stories would be to drown the calls for accountability⁠—which, I suspect, would be the point.

It would be like if the only reporting on Elon Musk and Ex-Twitter here was negative, even when he does good things like challenge the censorship regime in Brazil.

Yes, Elon manages to stumble into doing something halfway decent every so often. Yes, that is always worth pointing out. That said: Ignoring Musk’s failures or downplaying his self-destructive tendencies would effectively propagandize him. False neutrality or a “view from nowhere” approach to covering people like Musk⁠—or institutions like policing⁠—only “works” if the goal of taking that approach is to downplay or whitewash stories that paint their subjects in a negative light. If the emperor looks naked, the emperor is naked; to say otherwise is to ignore the truth.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:9

he intent of my post was to remind certain shitposters of the fact raised in said post. But I recognize that I offended you by implying, however accidentally, that you held a position that you don’t. I apologize for the mistake and will remind myself to better express my intent in the future.

Given what ineffective communicators autists are, Stone, there’s little hope for you to do better.

Sorry, friend.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5

Agree with first AC above. Asperger highlighted the potential skills of 200 autistic boys while sending 800 other neurodivergent children, some of whom would also have been autistic, to their deaths at Am Spiegelgrund. So although he may have been a champion of some autistic people, he was far from a champion of neurodiversity in general.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

JMT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

I specifically questioned the lack of coverage of heroic police officers who go above and beyond the call of duty in protecting productive citizens’ property.

There are plenty of media outlets that run ‘brave cop’ puff pieces, but that’s all they are. Calling out bad behavior, especially egregious stories like this one, is far more important because publicity is about the only thing that seems to make a dent in it. A cop doing the job they’re well paid to do is not news. A cop doing their job a bit better than their colleagues can be a nice story. But shit like this should be spread widely and loudly until cops learn it is not acceptable.

I didn’t know autism hindered reading comprehension, too!!

Not super surprised that the person desperate for cops to be put on a pedestal is also an insufferable asshole. Also, irony.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Right, because asking why this site doesn’t dedicate coverage of exceptional police heroism similar to

…those who bravely stood outside of the school in Uvalde.

So this incident should be ignored so that we don’t hurt the “brave men and women” who don’t hold their own accountable?

You’re quite the dumbass. I’m sure your mother would be proud of raising such a cuck.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

I’m merely asking why it is that this site seems to limit its coverage of law enforcement to highlighting very rare instances of police seemingly failing to perform at the absolute highest level. Why is their coverage so biased? Does the blogger in question have a sick hatred of police and law-and-order generally?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

If “not beating and shocking someone who’s suffering a medical emergency” is your idea of “perform[ing] at the absolute highest level,” then your standards for acceptable police conduct must be quite low. Personally, I consider my family’s well-being more important than my property, but you do you.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Right? Why didn’t they have 10000000 stories today about everything that happened?!

It’s almost like they have limited time and pick and choose what they write about.

“rare instances” that are exposed on a daily basis and show systemic corruption and criminality every single time across the country.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

It’s almost like they have limited time and pick and choose what they write about.

Don’t be disingenuous. The only topic this author cares to cover is news of our noble police possibly not performing to the highest, most-exacting standard. I.e, he is obsessed with writing negative stories about police.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

The only topic this author cares to cover is news of our noble police possibly not performing to the highest, most-exacting standard.

Society gives an incredible amount of power and privilege to the police. For what reason shouldn’t the police be held to the highest possible standards in how they use that power and privilege, especially when use of that power could conceivably result in someone being killed?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

As someone who suffers from epilepsy, this is a fear I have lived with for a while. The police have been called to my home multiple times due to the erratic behavior I’ve displayed while having a seizure. Waking up in a hospital with no memory of what happened after something like this is bad enough, I can only imagine how much worse it would be if the police showed up to the hospital afterwards, handcuffed me to the bed, and told me they were charging me with assault. Luckily, now the police in my area know me and know what to expect when they get a call to my house for a seizure. All officers should be trained to recognize and properly deal with situations like this, but as I’ve experienced first hand, they often don’t realize what they’re seeing and how to deal with it properly. I’ve always been very worried about what could happen if I have a seizure in an area where officers who don’t know me respond. Most people don’t fully understand the kind of complications (like the one mentioned in this article) that can occur when interacting with police as a result of a serious medical condition like this.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Do you wear a first alert bracelet? I’m sure in this scenario, the officer never bothered to check (and since it was a first event, wouldn’t have found one anyway), but those bracelets have saved many lives because first responders were able to quickly context shift to understand what was likely the cause of erratic behavior.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Yes, I do have a bracelet that indicates I suffer from seizures. The problem seems to be that unless you’re having the typical grand-mal seizure when police arrive, they often jump to the conclusion that you’re strung out on drugs rather than having a seizure. Most of my seizures are not in the grand-mal stage by the time the police arrive. If you’re not lying on the floor shaking, and are instead screaming and acting disoriented or violent, they like to assume it’s not a seizure and is instead something else, like drugs. Many seizures are not like what you see in pop culture. They often exhibit themselves in other ways such as screaming and/or roaming around looking confused/disoriented and “drugged out”. Unless you are familiar with or trained to identify what is actually happening, it’s easy to mistake a seizure for something like drug-induced psychosis. Due to the way the muscles tense up, the person having the seizure can exhibit strength beyond what is normal which increases the danger to those around you and makes it much harder to subdue the person. That’s why police need to be trained to understand that just because someone is acting erratically doesn’t necessarily mean they are on drugs. Even with my seizure bracelet, I’ve been told that the officers have often argued amongst themselves and with my family that what they are seeing is not a seizure and is instead some kind of drug induced psychosis. This is usually because they think specifically of ‘grand-mal’ type seizures and may not realize there are many other types of seizure.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Just wanted to add: If you watch the videos in the original article, the man is also not in the grand-mal stage of a seizure. You can tell he is disoriented, confused, and he likely has no idea what is going on while the officers try to tase and restrain him. Tasing does not accomplish anything when you’re dealing with someone who’s having a seizure. My family has a nasal spray (midazolam) that they can use to quickly and safely bring me out of a seizure. Paramedics also carry this in their kits, and thus should be the ones dealing with things like this. Handcuffs and tasers will not help to subdue someone having a seizure, they will only make things worse.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Well, they shouldn’t treat people with violence just because they are disoriented for other reasons like intoxication, either.

Even for people who are just scared, and say, refuse to open the door – just let the situation play out. There is no reason to establish forcible domination immediately. That should be limited to people with weapons trying to kill other people (i.e., not including themselves).

ECA (profile) says:

Anyone

Ever see a flyball governor?
If you EVER try to stop this thing, you are a FOOL.
Walk into a situation, WHICH was told to you, as generally MEDICAL. And think you need to Jump on a person in an Epileptic Seizure. YOU are asking to be Thrown Across the room.

Ask my mother, about sitting on top of me while I was sleeping and having 1.
ASK me about waking up in the middle of one, While mother was on top of me.

cashncarry (profile) says:

There might have been a different outcome in Australia

In her excellent book Becoming Abolitionists Derecka Purnell makes a very compelling argument for concluding that police should only ever be involved when there’s strong evidence that a crime has been committed.

Regardless of the amount of training they receive, expecting every single police officer in every single police department to be able to recognise, diagnose and handle medical or mental health events either competently or compassionately or intelligently, is an exercise in futility. That’s just not the mindset of the average cop.

Interestingly, I don’t think the sequence of events reported here in Bruce Frankel’s case would have occurred in Australia. When we call “triple-zero” (the Australian equivalent of 911) the operator asks exactly one question: “do you want Police, Fire Brigade or Ambulance?”

If you ask for Ambulance, you get connected to a paramedic who guides you through initial diagnosis and first aid, and assesses whether an ambulance should be dispatched.

I’m not saying that that first-contact paramedic might not use their own judgement to call police (eg hearing sounds of domestic violence). Neither am I saying that paramedics arriving on the scene might not similarly use their own judgement to call police (eg a dead body and blood everywhere).

But, absent some indication that a call to triple-zero was for something other than a medical emergency, it’s presumed to be a medical event. Calls to triple-zero don’t see police elbowing their way into and otherwise interfering with medical decisions and procedures.

I don’t want to suggest that Australia is some paradise where police are never involved in medical misadventures. One recent example is from November 2023 where a 95 year old 43kg (6.8 stone) grandmother with dementia was tased. She lived in a nursing home. News reports said she was wandering around on her walking frame holding a steak knife, possibly looking for a midnight snack. Police were called. Rather than just calmly taking the knife away from her, feeding her, and putting her back to bed, she wound up dead. The cop has been charged with manslaughter.

The first question I asked myself was why the hell did nursing home staff feel the need to call police? I have yet to see any media reports containing a satisfactory answer.

I wonder the same thing here. Why were police even involved in Bruce Frankel’s case in the first place? Is it routine for a 911 call asking for paramedics to also result in the dispatch of police? Perhaps that’s the thing that needs to change.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...