Current Affairs Should you be jailed for Social network comments ?

[Dodgyknees]

Careful Dr_Pangloss, the thought police'll get you ;-)

[Dodgyknees]

another good example of the law going mad.

apple

[PompeyVillan]

I'm finding it increasingly difficult to accept that people are being put in prison for airing 'offensive' views. What the hell are we as a nation turning into?

The t-shirt thing. To me, the t-shirt isn't a problem, but wearing it in public is. I'm debating in with myself as to whether it should be a crime, I'm not sure it is. He's an idiot either way.

But anyway, it's has been deemed a crime. So if it is a crime use some flipping common sense would you, it's hardly worth putting someone away for, regardless of their criminal history. Take the shirt off him, fine him, or get him picking litter for a few days. Don't put him in prison.

[bickster]

David Cameron has been called on to block a Plymouth Tory candidate from standing for election again, after he caused outrage in the city with a sick joke on Twitter about Jimmy Savile’s alleged child abuse.

Craig Duncan, who stood for the local Conservatives in Stoke ward of Plymouth City Council, sent the tweet on 7th October:

The local Labour Party has complained to the Prime Minister, as well as to the leader of the city’s Conservative group, highlighting the candidate’s “laid-back attitude to what are incredibly worrying allegations of child abuse“, but have yet to receive any response.

Clicky

Jail him?

A Conservative councillor in Derbyshire is facing calls from all sides to quit, after he made a tasteless and offensive joke about two dead police officers.

Cllr David Stephenson, having already lost his position on the council’s cabinet over the remarks, now faces calls from both the Greater Manchester Police Federation and the chief constable of Derbyshire Police to quit as a councillor. Ian Hanson, chairman of the GMPFsaid:

“The Conservative Party should put pressure on this individual to stand down as an elected representative.”

But despite having apologised, Cllr Stephenson seemed to retain a stubborn streak. He complained that:

“This was a mistake, a sick joke that has gone wrong. I think the punishment has been very severe”

Having been sacked from the council cabinet, Cllr Stephenson has already lost £5,500 per year — and would lose another £4,000 if he were completely forced out.

clicky

Jail Him?

No of course not, in either case

[Qwpzxjor1]

What happened in Holland?

A girl forgot to change the privacy of her Facebook party invite and kept it open for all. It became a bit of fun with thousands of people inviting each other to this small town for a girls birthday party. All very fun, but then everyone actually turned up.

Handful of people died, many many injured and god knows how much damage to a small suburban town.

Not really related to freedom of speech, etc.. I know.. but it does show that society, as a whole, is not responsible enough to use social networking unregulated.

Edit: That news report is actually incredibly tame (I hadn't actually read it when I posted it, just found the top google link). My girlfriend is Dutch and knew a handful of people that were involved in this. It was a riot, out and out violence. And it was extremely messy; as I said, a handful of people actually died, something that news report oddly omits.

[peterms]

I'm finding it increasingly difficult to accept that people are being put in prison for airing 'offensive' views. What the hell are we as a nation turning into?

The t-shirt thing. To me, the t-shirt isn't a problem, but wearing it in public is. I'm debating in with myself as to whether it should be a crime, I'm not sure it is. He's an idiot either way.

But anyway, it's has been deemed a crime. So if it is a crime use some flipping common sense would you, it's hardly worth putting someone away for, regardless of their criminal history. Take the shirt off him, fine him, or get him picking litter for a few days. Don't put him in prison.

Stuart Duke, defending, said Thew had been an inpatient at a mental health unit and was still on anti-psychotic medicine, but the judge replied mental health was "not a factor".

Seems like a guaranteed appeal. Should also lead to questioning the judge's future - allowing personal political views to override medical evidence is absolutely unacceptable in a judge (and extremely basic to their role). He appears unfit to discharge his responsibilities.

[rjw63]

Etch a Sketch joke is hilarious!

[KHV]

Etch a Sketch joke is hilarious!

I enjoyed that one too

[leviramsey]

More from PopeHat, which more or less matches my views (Ken @ PopeHat has become a hero of mine)

It's really not my intent to make this bash-the-UK week.

In my defense, they seem to be trolling me.

Dateline: Lancashire. A 19-year-old oaf named Michael Woods writes nasty and stupid things on the internet about the abduction and murder of five-year-old April Jones. For this — for the crime of sending a "message or other matter that is grossly offensive by means of a public electronic communications network" — he was arrested "for his own safety" and, after a guilty plea, sentenced to three months in jail by outraged authorites. What did he say?

Matthew Woods, 19, from Chorley, Lancashire, made derogatory posts about April and missing Madeleine McCann after getting the idea from Sickipedia, a website that "trades in sick jokes".

Among his comments was: "I woke up this morning in the back of a transit van with two beautiful little girls, I found April in a hopeless place."

Another read: "Who in their right mind would abduct a ginger kid?"

Others stated: "I love April Jones" and "Could have just started the greatest Facebook argument ever. April Fools, Who Wants Maddie?"

He also wrote comments of a sexually explicit nature about April, who went missing last week from near her home in Machynlleth, mid-Wales.

Thanks to typically poor reporting of legal matters, it's difficult to suss out whether Woods posted these things as Facebook status updates, or whether he posted them to someone else's wall, or as a comment on a story about April Jones. The press coverage is sufficient to show, however, that the United Kingdom has successful trained its citizens to believe that offensive speech is a criminal justice matter:

Chorley magistrates heard members of the public were so upset about his posts they reported them to the police.

Woods is a dick, to be sure, but a mundane one. Much worse trolls — the sort who specifically target victims' families and memorial pages — are common, and places like YouTube are full of folks fond of saying things just as stupid and offensive to get attention.

Is the United Kingdom going to spend its time and money (not to mention its common-law heritage) going after all of them?

The answer appears to be that the UK will continue to arrest and prosecute online asshats who offend a sufficient number of people, or who offend people in connection with a sufficiently popular public figure. Being a racist dick about a popular footballer on Twitter will get you two months in jail. Tash-talk and hyperbole on Twitter about an Olympic contender will get you arrested. Trash-talk both a rival football club and Catholics on Facebook? That's eight months in jail. Racist twitter messages to a different footballer? That's arrest, conviction, and community service. Make a bad joke about blowing up an airport – a joke nobody takes seriously? That's a two year legal ordeal for you, mate.

What's the difference between someone who gets prosecuted, and someone who doesn't? Well, it seems pretty clear that being a dick to a popular athlete is unusually risky. But the difference may only exist in the minds of the U.K.'s criminal justice system, and struggling to figure it out themselves. The potential for preferential treatment and abuse is manifest.

I could look at each case and argue, in detail, why the prosecution of the lout in question was a violation of basic free speech principles. But the most alarming thing about this trend is not any individual case, but the government's goals and the public sentiment supporting them. Free people don't claim a right to be free of offense, and don't expect the criminal justice system to protect them from mean words, as opposed to true threats. Limited and principled governments don't cultivate amongst the populace a desire to see rude speech punished with jail.

So: the point is not that the United Kingdom's Canute-like ambition to sweep asshattery from the internet is ridiculous. The point is that it encourages the populace to be subservient to government, and encourages the government to take advantage of that subservience.

I do also like this comment:

"I woke up this morning in the back of a transit van with two beautiful little girls, I found April in a hopeless place."

Is that a joke? I can't tell what's the joke.

"Who in their right mind would abduct a ginger kid?"

Better, uses discriminatory nonsense, but at least a decent attempt at humor.

"Could have just started the greatest Facebook argument ever. April Fools, Who Wants Maddie?"

Okay, we're getting to some actual jokes here, he's moved on to punning. Keep it up kid, you'll get to legitimate humor eventually.

[Jon]

As much as he's a tosser and shit at basic maths. I don't think he should be jailed for that either. If that's any sort of an offence it's the sort of offence that community service is the perfect antidote for.

Jailing someone for clearly not liking the forces of law and order, probably because he's feeling resentful towards them over his previous offence(s), isn't going to change his mind is it? It'll probably make him hate the police even more.

Do I agree with what he said? No certainly not. Do I think he's an idiot? Yes I most certainly do. Putting him in jail however makes the state the biggest idiot. It's yet another example of pseudo-moral outrage winning over common sense and it keeps the real news off the front page so it serves its purpose.

I don't disagree. I was just pointing out that he was a tosser, and shit at maths (or math, if you're an illiterate American ). I don't think people should be locked up for being tossers, or espousing quite odious views. Surely as a society we can deal with people with odious views, without having to jail them?

[peterms]

Good piece here contrasting the heavy sentences for general comments which are found offensive, and direct, personal, threatening comments made to individual's faces, which are treated more leniently.

I should think most people would see a direct personal piece of intimidation as more serrious than some oaf grandstanding on facebook, but it seems the law sees it differently. That gives a strong indication that it is the particular sentiment which is being punished, rather than the act itself.

[Eames]

As much as he's a tosser and shit at basic maths. I don't think he should be jailed for that either. If that's any sort of an offence it's the sort of offence that community service is the perfect antidote for.

Jailing someone for clearly not liking the forces of law and order, probably because he's feeling resentful towards them over his previous offence(s), isn't going to change his mind is it? It'll probably make him hate the police even more.

Do I agree with what he said? No certainly not. Do I think he's an idiot? Yes I most certainly do. Putting him in jail however makes the state the biggest idiot. It's yet another example of pseudo-moral outrage winning over common sense and it keeps the real news off the front page so it serves its purpose.

Shouldn't have been jailed. Should have just been tied to a chair and locked in a room with the two coppers station mates for a couple of minutes.

In fact, that would be the perfect solution to over crowding in the prison system. If you are found guilty of an offence you are tied to a chair and locked locked in a room with the victims of said crime. The length of stay in the room is determined by some Duckworth Lewis type formula, taking into account frailty of victim, frailty of perp, impact/nature of crime.

Insta-justice. Right..... off to sort the economy next.

[Qwpzxjor1]

In fact, that would be the perfect solution to over crowding in the prison system. If you are found guilty of an offence you are tied to a chair and locked locked in a room with the victims of said crime. The length of stay in the room is determined by some Duckworth Lewis type formula, taking into account frailty of victim, frailty of perp, impact/nature of crime.

Insta-justice. Right..... off to sort the economy next.

Idea has been done. It was called Outlawing.

[PompeyVillan]

http://www.dailymail...e-pictures.html

Anonymous has named a man it claims posted topless pictures of a 15-year-old girl online and harassed her so relentlessly that she killed herself.

Amanda Todd, from Vancouver, Canada, was found hanged in her home on October 10, just weeks after she uploaded a video to YouTube detailing her horrific treatment at the hands of cyber bullies.

When she was just 12, a man in an internet chat room convinced her to flash her breasts, and a year later, he plastered a picture of the incident across Facebook.

Now in a vigilante move, Anonymous, the world's largest hacking group, has named the man allegedly responsible for the picture.

The group claims that he is a 32-year-old from British Columbia, but MailOnline has chosen not to identify him for legal reasons.

As Todd's supporters set up Facebook pages warning the man to 'sleep with one eye open', the move by Anonymous sparks concerns over its abilities to create a 'trial by internet' - bypassing the justice system and casting guilt.

In a video posted to YouTube by Anonymous, a figure claims the group lists his personal information, including his date of birth and address.

It explains that his username appears on websites where he 'blackmailed' and gave advice to young girls. The same username is also tied to a website with a 'jailbait' photo gallery.

'[He] is an abomination to our society, and will be punished,' the Anonymous figure says.

Referring to the possibility they might have the wrong man, they add: 'At the most this is the person who did this to Amanda Todd, and at the least it's another pedophile that enjoys taking advantage of children.'

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police refused to confirm Anonymous have the right man but a spokesperson said they were aware that someone had been named.

'We are aware of what’s being posted online and certainly following up what we feel is important to follow up,' Sergeant Peter Thiessen told The Globe and Mail, adding: '[Vigilantes] run the risk of committing a criminal offence.'

Todd's family members also said they are not sure the Anonymous report is accurate and said police have tracked down a person living in the U.S. whom they believed was involved.

The claims come weeks after Amanda posted a nearly nine-minute YouTube video detailing her treatment on a stack of notecards held up to the camera,

Todd says that a year after she flashed her breasts, the man tracked her down and demanded he put on a show for him or he would expose her.

When she refused, he created a Facebook page with a list of her friends and used her naked chest as the profile photo. The picture quickly spread across the internet and among her classmates.

'He is an abomination to our society and will be punished' Anonymous

It led to relentless bullying online, she said, and she was diagnosed with depression and started drinking.

In the video, posted September 7, she admitted that she had previously tried to kill herself twice and has been hospitalised.

After moving to a different city and school, another instance of bullying occurred after she started a romantic relationship with an older man who had a girlfriend.

Once that relationship soured, she was confronted and beaten up by the man's girlfriend. She was hit in front of a crowd of screaming people who encouraged her to be left in a ditch.

Amanda does not speak in the video, and her face is not fully shown, but she confirmed her identity with the last notecard which says her name.

One of the final images is a jarring picture of her arm which had been cut repeatedly. Just under six weeks after posting the video, Todd could take the bullying no longer, and took her own life.

During a memorial for Todd on Monday, her friends said they have been aware of a man in his 30s 'stalking' their friend for years.

'There were multiple accounts with random names,' one friend told QMI Agency. 'There were Twitter accounts also used.'

The Vancouver Sun reported that Amanda was a student in Grade 10 at the Coquitlam Basic Alternative Education school.

The principal of the school confirmed her death and said that she had become connected with many since she transferred to the school in the middle of last year.

'It is a very sad case,' Paul McNaughton told the paper. 'I can tell you we feel we tried everything we could to help her when she came to us.'

Her death prompted a local politician to release a video of her own that pleads to put an end to bullying.

'I just heard about Amanda. I want to say to everyone who loved her, to all her family and friends, how sorry I am about her loss,' British Columbia premier Christy Clark said.

'No one deserves to be bullied. No one earns it. No one asks for it. It isn't a rite of passage. Bullying has to stop.'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRxfTyNa24A

So this is a story of a young girl who kills herself after some naive behaviour in a chat room (flashing to a stranger) which leads to a tragic chain of events, brutal harassment and bullying. The story and video (in particular) is saddening and a true case of so called 'trolling', which is indeed criminal in the extreme. It had me close to tears. Very much a story of our times, I feel very saddened that young people are exposed to so much so young in this technological age, but that is a discussion for another thread.

What is interesting and unique in this case is the involvement of 'hactivist' group 'Anonymous' revealing who they believe to be Amanda's harasser to the world. Even by their ambiguous moral standards, this is bizarre and problematic. They're not even sure that the person they have revealed is actually the man who harassed poor Amanda, but they're fairly certain he's responsible for posting pictures of underage girls on the site Reddit. So by naming and shaming this man publicly (without any evidence), this man is likely to be subjected to the very same treatment that Amanda received.

Vigilante justice, or a witchunt? Either way, this whole 'trolling' issue is becoming incredibly prominent in the news and media. This is a story that has struck a chord with me, not only due to it's tragic nature, but due to it's implications on online behaviour and 'trolling'.

[tonyh29]

Im not really one for vigilantes and twitter style campaigns so I'd rather 'anonymous ' left it to the police

[MMFy]

That's not trolling. That's outright harassment and bullying. It's about as much to do with trolling as it is to do with cricket.

[snowychap]

Trolls ought to have nothing to do with cricket.

[tonyh29]

So the BBC news just now talked about the 9 defendants who pleaded guilty to naming the Chad Evans rape victim , but didn't name them... And then named the one person who pleaded Not Guilty .. Shouldnt the not guilty person have anonymity until such time they are found guilty ( or not )

[snowychap]

The beeb have named all of the defendants in their website article.

[bickster]

Teenager arrested for posting burning poppy picture on Facebook

Nineteen-year-old from Canterbury detained after reportedly posting image on Facebook of a remembrance poppy being set alightBurning poppy row – the arrest has provoked criticism from human rights groups, with Big Brother Watch urging Kent police to drop their inquiry. Photograph: John Giles/PA

A teenager arrested on Remembrance Sunday on suspicion of posting a picture of a burning poppy on Facebook is being questioned by police.

The 19-year-old was held after the image of a poppy being set ablaze by a lighter was reportedly posted online with the caption: "How about that you squadey word removeds".

Police said the man, from Canterbury, Kent, was detained on suspicion of an offence under the Malicious Communications Act after officers were contacted at about 4pm on Sunday.

The arrest provoked concern over a perceived clampdown on civil liberties, with the Big Brother Watch campaign group urging Kent police to drop their investigation.

Jamie's Pants, under @thisisrjg, tweeted: "We do not have a right to not be offended. We certainly don't have a right to lock up someone for offending some people," while Thom Lumley, tweeting as @Hotstepperrr, wrote: "Dear idiots at Kent Police, burning a poppy may be obnoxious, but it is not a criminal offence."

David Allen Green, a journalist and lawyer for the New Statesman, tweeting as Jack of Kent, wrote: "What was the point of winning either World War if, in 2012, someone can be casually arrested by Kent Police for burning a poppy?"

The Australian musician and comedian Tim Minchin also tweeted his incredulity, saying: "You've a right to burn a (fake!) poppy. Whether I agree with the action is utterly irrelevant. Kent Police are out of line."

Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch, criticised the arrest as "utterly ridiculous". He said: "Kent police need to urgently release this man and drop an utterly ridiculous investigation into something that has harmed no one.

"It is not illegal to offend people and, however idiotic or insensitive the picture may have been, it is certainly not worthy of arrest. The case highlights the urgent need to reform a law that poses a serious risk tofreedom of speech after several ludicrous prosecutions in recent months."

In March last year, Emdadur Choudhury, a member of Muslims Against Crusades, was fined £50 after burning replica poppies on the anniversary of Armistice Day.

Choudhury had denied a charge under Section 5 of the Public Order Act of burning the poppies in a way that was likely to cause "harassment, harm or distress" to those who witnessed it. But he was guilty of a "calculated and deliberate" insult to the dead and those who mourn them when he burned two large plastic poppies during a two-minute silence on 11 November, a judge at Belmarsh magistrates court said.

The Royal British Legion declined to comment on the investigation in Kent.

Kent police said: "Officers were contacted at around 4pm yesterday and alerted to the picture, which was reportedly accompanied by an offensive comment.

"Following an investigation by Kent police, a 19-year-old Canterbury man was arrested on suspicion of an offence under the Malicious Communications Act. He is currently in custody."

Guardian Clicky

You couldn't make it up. There's an irony in there about dying to save us from fascism, I'm sure you'll spot it.