4 months for "Trolling"

Skepticemea · 13th September 2011, 07:41 AM

Reading man jailed for "trolling"

I abhor what he did but am also disturbed that he has been jailed.

sarge · 13th September 2011, 07:47 AM

Is this type of sentence, and the additional ban on the use of social networking sites, the norm in England? I suspect this would be protected speech over here.

Monketey Ghost · 13th September 2011, 07:49 AM

Agree on both counts. Terrible thing to do, but jail?

Darat · 13th September 2011, 07:49 AM

Originally Posted by Skepticemea

Reading man jailed for "trolling"

I abhor what he did but am also disturbed that he has been jailed.

Not saying twas right or wrong but it's nothing new is it? People have been jailed for sending "...a communication of an indecent or offensive nature..." for as long as we've had the likes of a postal service.

Monketey Ghost · 13th September 2011, 07:52 AM

Indecent...

offensive nature...

Surely would be protected speech here in the US.

HansMustermann · 13th September 2011, 07:57 AM

Yet in the USA people have been jailed for sending obscene materials by post. Read, selling porn DVDs online. It seems to me like protected speech has its limits over there too.

Darat · 13th September 2011, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost

Indecent...

offensive nature...

Surely would be protected speech here in the US.

For Utah: http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/854.html

Quote:

...snip...

However, the government can regulate the following four things:

Sending obscene material through the mail (18 U.S.C. 1461);
Distribution of pornography (76-10-1204 U.C.A.);
Mailing material with indecent pictures or words on the wrapper
or envelope (18 U.S.C. 1463); and
Continuing to send material after you file a prohibitory order (39 U.S.C. 3008 and 3010).

...snip...

Darat · 13th September 2011, 08:07 AM

This is another one of those areas (privacy is another one) that seems to cause some shock in folk when they find that the "teh interweb" is being treated like we've always treated stuff.

Lamuella · 13th September 2011, 08:11 AM

he's clearly a horrible person, but being a horrible person isn't enough for a jail sentence in my opinion.

Greedo · 13th September 2011, 08:12 AM

What the man did was obviously a disgusting thing to do, but four months of jail? If this had happened in the US I'd have said "only in America.", but it seems that is not so.

Cavemonster · 13th September 2011, 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

For Utah: http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/854.html

For context though, these are regulated that way because they use the mail, a public utility. In the US mail is more controlled and less protected by free speech rights than other media of communication.

Of course you can find examples of individuals charged for stupid things like swearing in front of a minor, but for the most part, freedom of speech here is protected even into the realm of the offensive.

That's why the WBC can stand a certain distance from an ongoing funeral holding signs and chanting that the deceased is burning in hell.

Ron_Tomkins · 13th September 2011, 08:18 AM

There you go. That's what happens So now Yrreg, Epix, DOC, Bill Thompson and the like... watch it from now on!

roger · 13th September 2011, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

This is another one of those areas (privacy is another one) that seems to cause some shock in folk when they find that the "teh interweb" is being treated like we've always treated stuff.

I'm no lawyer. On the surface, it seems different to have legislation about sending material privately from one party to another, and protected speech .

For example, 18 U.S.C 1461 is specially about mailing this material. It would be not illegal based on this law to hand out flyers on the street, to say this stuff to another person, etc. Certainly it goes on all the times on the streets of Vegas.

I think most people view forums and such as public speech (not sure that is a legal term, hopefully my meaning is clear) rather than something akin to mailing.

For example, read the law(source) - you are not allowed to mail information about abortions! It's a really outdated law, I would think, in most people's mind, and we certainly wouldn't think that people should not be allowed to talk about abortion, or post about it on a forum. Yet, for some reason, you can't mail information about abortion.

Quote:

Every written or printed card, letter, circular, book, pamphlet, advertisement, or notice of any kind giving information...or by whom any act or operation of any kind for the procuring or producing of abortion will be done or performed,

Again, I am no lawyer, but I read that as saying you can't mail information about planned parenthoood, or information about drugs that induce abortion, etc. I would certainly be very surprised if I wasn't allowed to provide somebody information about abortions via speech or an internet forum.

Psi Baba · 13th September 2011, 08:24 AM

I think an appropriate punishment for this guy would be to set up a web site about him with a message board where posters can make fun of him and humiliate him.

Skeptic Ginger · 13th September 2011, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost

Indecent...

offensive nature...

Surely would be protected speech here in the US.

Maybe that is the problem rather than the fact the guy got a few weeks in jail for cruel behavior.

I don't think the first amendment would suffer for stopping this kind of 'speech'. I doubt the guy could make a case that he had anything to say with that behavior. Seems more like he needs a psychiatrist. I don't think a schizophrenic harassing someone by ranting at them on the street would be seen as protected by free speech rights, for a comparable example.

Monketey Ghost · 13th September 2011, 08:29 AM

Do you mean by 'speech', speech?

Why does anyone have to make a case for what they say?

~is my two cents.

Darat · 13th September 2011, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by roger

I'm no lawyer. On the surface, it seems different to have legislation about sending material privately from one party to another, and protected speech .

For example, 18 U.S.C 1461 is specially about mailing this material. It would be not illegal based on this law to hand out flyers on the street, to say this stuff to another person, etc. Certainly it goes on all the times on the streets of Vegas.

I think most people view forums and such as public speech (not sure that is a legal term, hopefully my meaning is clear) rather than something akin to mailing.

For example, read the law(source) - you are not allowed to mail information about abortions! It's a really outdated law, I would think, in most people's mind, and we certainly wouldn't think that people should not be allowed to talk about abortion, or post about it on a forum. Yet, for some reason, you can't mail information about abortion.

Again, I am no lawyer, but I read that as saying you can't mail information about planned parenthoood, or information about drugs that induce abortion, etc.

I'm in agreement with you, our legal systems are definitely lagging behind how society views these things and I think your "...forums and such as public speech.." is why people are shocked to find it's being dealt with like say making a nuisance phone call.

Yet saying that I suspect that if you ask someone over here in the UK should someone be prosecuted for say making nuisance phone calls (includes heavy breathing, obscene comments and the like) they would say yes. As ever society's mores are contradictory and ever so slightly incoherent!

roger · 13th September 2011, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

Yet saying that I suspect that if you ask someone over here in the UK should someone be prosecuted for say making nuisance phone calls (includes heavy breathing, obscene comments and the like) they would say yes. As ever society's mores are contradictory and ever so slightly incoherent!

Hmm, interesting analogy, and I would agree with you. I'm trying to parse why I think so, and the main reason is it is a private mechanism, but I'm not sure how rational that is. I certainly don't feel I should be protected from somebody saying "you are an idiot" to me on the street or on this forum (I'm talking legally, not about the forum rules). Interesting.

cwalner · 13th September 2011, 08:40 AM

When I first read the article, I misunderstood and thought that his posts were part of the bullying that led to the suicide, and found the sentence appropriate, if a bit light. Then as I read further, I realized that he made his posts to sites set up to memorialize young people who died prematurely and I realized he was just being a major league asshat.

But as others have mentioned, in most western democracies, it is not against the law to be an asshat, so the jail does seem a bit extreme. Even so, I still find it difficult to muster up much sympathy for the guy.

commandlinegamer · 13th September 2011, 08:41 AM

Poison pen letter writers have been gaoled in the past:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...is-jailed.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-campaign.html

JJM 777 · 13th September 2011, 09:06 AM

Only 4 months?

This guy was a (hint: Moby --) and needs something harsher to get to his senses. A year sounds better.

bluesjnr · 13th September 2011, 09:06 AM

I'm torn, this sentence seems excessive yet I have to consider the upset this must have caused for the relatives of the girl and wonder if this factored in to the judges decision.

What a sick thing to do and for what reason?

This case is not isolated and perhaps this sentence will send a message to these "jokers".

Babbylonian · 13th September 2011, 09:10 AM

It must be nice for the UK when they have enough space in jails to imprison people for being jerks.

At least it seems like a better reason to jail someone than drug use.

Skepticemea · 13th September 2011, 09:11 AM

Originally Posted by JJM 777

Only 4 months?

This guy was a (hint: Moby --) and needs something harsher to get to his senses. A year sounds better.

I'm not sure 4 months in prison will stop this bloke being a complete tool. Will probably just introduce him to a few more of them.

Sabretooth · 13th September 2011, 09:41 AM

Didn't some record store owner get jailed for selling gangsta-rap records in the early 90's?

ETA: Yep, in 1990...http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/02/us...rew-album.html

I Ratant · 13th September 2011, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by Sabretooth

Didn't some record store owner get jailed for selling gangsta-rap records in the early 90's?

.
2 Live Crew... in Florida..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_Live_Crew
.
I bought the "Nasty.." CD just because I can as an American.
Have never and will never listen to it.

ServiceSoon · 13th September 2011, 09:58 AM

You'll really run a tight (authoritative) ship don't cha.

Darat · 13th September 2011, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by roger

Hmm, interesting analogy, and I would agree with you. I'm trying to parse why I think so, and the main reason is it is a private mechanism, but I'm not sure how rational that is. I certainly don't feel I should be protected from somebody saying "you are an idiot" to me on the street or on this forum (I'm talking legally, not about the forum rules). Interesting.

I've used the analogy with nuisance calls in a few conversations with people and it seems to generate the same conflict with most folk, it's a strange one.

Skeptic Ginger · 13th September 2011, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost

Do you mean by 'speech', speech?

Why does anyone have to make a case for what they say?

~is my two cents.

I think one can make the distinction between getting your kicks by harassing people and the intent of the Constitution in regards to the right to free speech.

TubbaBlubba · 13th September 2011, 10:48 AM

I'm glad he's in jail, I just hope the slope isn't too slippery.

Architect · 13th September 2011, 10:53 AM

Quote:

I think one can make the distinction between getting your kicks by harassing people and the intent of the Constitution in regards to the right to free speech.

Or as the case may, the right to free speech is protected by the ECHR.

Newtons Bit · 13th September 2011, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by Sabretooth

Didn't some record store owner get jailed for selling gangsta-rap records in the early 90's?

ETA: Yep, in 1990...http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/02/us...rew-album.html

I read up on that back-story and was amazed at the number of people back then were recently in the news. Jack Thompson, the now disbarred anti-video game crusader, was the man who started it all. Dr. Gates, Jr, the black man who was arrested by a white police officer for breaking into his own house and later sat down for a beer with said police officer and the President, testified in defense of the band when they were charged with obscenity.

In the end, the appeals courts shut down the obscenity charges, however.

Rolfe · 13th September 2011, 11:16 AM

The perpetrator is being described on the news as having Asperger's syndrome.

Rolfe.

Didaktylos · 13th September 2011, 11:46 AM

I expect it would have been different if he had confined himself to ranting on his own blog/Facebook/Twitter.

NoahFence · 13th September 2011, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Lamuella

he's clearly a horrible person, but being a horrible person isn't enough for a jail sentence in my opinion.

Speaking only for me - I think it's freakin' funny! Serves him right.

Mark6 · 13th September 2011, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by Greedo

What the man did was obviously a disgusting thing to do, but four months of jail? If this had happened in the US I'd have said "only in America.", but it seems that is not so.

Only in Britain!

Seriously, it is not. Several countries already have laws against anonymous online bullying.

Which I happen to agree with. Part of free speech is taking responsibility for what you say. I do not believe in a right of anonymous free speech.

Sabretooth · 13th September 2011, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by TubbaBlubba

I'm glad he's in jail, I just hope the ~~slope~~ soap isn't too slippery.

ftfy

Mark6 · 13th September 2011, 12:03 PM

Oh, that's unnecessarily cruel. I am all for smooth and slippery soap.

cwalner · 13th September 2011, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by Darat

I've used the analogy with nuisance calls in a few conversations with people and it seems to generate the same conflict with most folk, it's a strange one.

The more I think about this guy, I think his actions are more comparable to those of Fred Phelps. He goes to public spaces set aside to mourn the loss of a loved one, and figuratively defecates on their grave in front of all of the mourners. 100% despicable, but not criminal.

Ron_Tomkins · 13th September 2011, 12:22 PM

Maybe the authorities were seriously inspired by this movie

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

13th September 2011, 07:41 AM	#1
Skepticemea Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: London, UK Posts: 2,277	4 months for "Trolling" Reading man jailed for "trolling" I abhor what he did but am also disturbed that he has been jailed.

13th September 2011, 07:47 AM	#2
sarge Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Fayetteville, NC Posts: 2,360	Is this type of sentence, and the additional ban on the use of social networking sites, the norm in England? I suspect this would be protected speech over here.
	__________________ I'm a not-so-strict constructionist, fiscally conservative, social liberal. Exactly which party represents me?

13th September 2011, 07:49 AM	#3
Monketey Ghost Body of Work Join Date: May 2003 Location: I'm on your screen! Posts: 14,807	Agree on both counts. Terrible thing to do, but jail?
	__________________ _{The membership of this forum is henceforth to refer to me as potato-headed Bobby} _{SSKCAS, member in long standing}

13th September 2011, 07:49 AM	#4
Darat Lackey Administrator / JREF Forum Liaison Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 64,803	Originally Posted by Skepticemea Reading man jailed for "trolling" I abhor what he did but am also disturbed that he has been jailed. Not saying twas right or wrong but it's nothing new is it? People have been jailed for sending "...a communication of an indecent or offensive nature..." for as long as we've had the likes of a postal service.
	__________________ If it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart? - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn 1918-2008 Last edited by Darat; 13th September 2011 at 08:01 AM. Reason: +'

13th September 2011, 07:52 AM	#5
Monketey Ghost Body of Work Join Date: May 2003 Location: I'm on your screen! Posts: 14,807	Indecent... offensive nature... Surely would be protected speech here in the US.
	__________________ _{The membership of this forum is henceforth to refer to me as potato-headed Bobby} _{SSKCAS, member in long standing}

13th September 2011, 07:57 AM	#6
HansMustermann Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 9,851	Yet in the USA people have been jailed for sending obscene materials by post. Read, selling porn DVDs online. It seems to me like protected speech has its limits over there too.

13th September 2011, 08:04 AM	#7
Darat Lackey Administrator / JREF Forum Liaison Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 64,803	Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost Indecent... offensive nature... Surely would be protected speech here in the US. For Utah: http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/854.html Quote: ...snip... However, the government can regulate the following four things: Sending obscene material through the mail (18 U.S.C. 1461); Distribution of pornography (76-10-1204 U.C.A.); Mailing material with indecent pictures or words on the wrapper or envelope (18 U.S.C. 1463); and Continuing to send material after you file a prohibitory order (39 U.S.C. 3008 and 3010). ...snip...
	__________________ If it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart? - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn 1918-2008

13th September 2011, 08:07 AM	#8
Darat Lackey Administrator / JREF Forum Liaison Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 64,803	This is another one of those areas (privacy is another one) that seems to cause some shock in folk when they find that the "teh interweb" is being treated like we've always treated stuff.
	__________________ If it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart? - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn 1918-2008

13th September 2011, 08:11 AM	#9
Lamuella Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,480	he's clearly a horrible person, but being a horrible person isn't enough for a jail sentence in my opinion.
Lamuella Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,480

13th September 2011, 08:12 AM	#10
Greedo Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 1,579	What the man did was obviously a disgusting thing to do, but four months of jail? If this had happened in the US I'd have said "only in America.", but it seems that is not so.
Greedo Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 1,579	__________________ "Persuade thyself that imperfection and inconvenience are the natural lot of mortals and there will be no room for discontent, neither for despair." -T.I.

13th September 2011, 08:15 AM	#11
Cavemonster Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 3,916	Originally Posted by Darat For Utah: http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/854.html For context though, these are regulated that way because they use the mail, a public utility. In the US mail is more controlled and less protected by free speech rights than other media of communication. Of course you can find examples of individuals charged for stupid things like swearing in front of a minor, but for the most part, freedom of speech here is protected even into the realm of the offensive. That's why the WBC can stand a certain distance from an ongoing funeral holding signs and chanting that the deceased is burning in hell.
Cavemonster Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 3,916	__________________ The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON

13th September 2011, 08:18 AM	#12
Ron_Tomkins Satan's Helper Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: NYC Posts: 32,051	There you go. That's what happens So now Yrreg, Epix, DOC, Bill Thompson and the like... watch it from now on!
	__________________ "I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan" Carl Sagan

13th September 2011, 08:22 AM	#13
roger Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2002 Location: Mountain View, CA Posts: 11,021	Originally Posted by Darat This is another one of those areas (privacy is another one) that seems to cause some shock in folk when they find that the "teh interweb" is being treated like we've always treated stuff. I'm no lawyer. On the surface, it seems different to have legislation about sending material privately from one party to another, and protected speech . For example, 18 U.S.C 1461 is specially about mailing this material. It would be not illegal based on this law to hand out flyers on the street, to say this stuff to another person, etc. Certainly it goes on all the times on the streets of Vegas. I think most people view forums and such as public speech (not sure that is a legal term, hopefully my meaning is clear) rather than something akin to mailing. For example, read the law(source) - you are not allowed to mail information about abortions! It's a really outdated law, I would think, in most people's mind, and we certainly wouldn't think that people should not be allowed to talk about abortion, or post about it on a forum. Yet, for some reason, you can't mail information about abortion. Quote: Every written or printed card, letter, circular, book, pamphlet, advertisement, or notice of any kind giving information...or by whom any act or operation of any kind for the procuring or producing of abortion will be done or performed, Again, I am no lawyer, but I read that as saying you can't mail information about planned parenthoood, or information about drugs that induce abortion, etc. I would certainly be very surprised if I wasn't allowed to provide somebody information about abortions via speech or an internet forum.
	__________________ May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop off like autumn leaves. - John Muir Last edited by roger; 13th September 2011 at 08:26 AM.

13th September 2011, 08:24 AM	#14
Psi Baba Homo Skepticalis Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Occupying my barstool Posts: 3,183	I think an appropriate punishment for this guy would be to set up a web site about him with a message board where posters can make fun of him and humiliate him.

13th September 2011, 08:24 AM	#15
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,628	Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost Indecent... offensive nature... Surely would be protected speech here in the US. Maybe that is the problem rather than the fact the guy got a few weeks in jail for cruel behavior. I don't think the first amendment would suffer for stopping this kind of 'speech'. I doubt the guy could make a case that he had anything to say with that behavior. Seems more like he needs a psychiatrist. I don't think a schizophrenic harassing someone by ranting at them on the street would be seen as protected by free speech rights, for a comparable example.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

13th September 2011, 08:29 AM	#16
Monketey Ghost Body of Work Join Date: May 2003 Location: I'm on your screen! Posts: 14,807	Do you mean by 'speech', speech? Why does anyone have to make a case for what they say? ~is my two cents.
	__________________ _{The membership of this forum is henceforth to refer to me as potato-headed Bobby} _{SSKCAS, member in long standing}

13th September 2011, 08:30 AM	#17
Darat Lackey Administrator / JREF Forum Liaison Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 64,803	Originally Posted by roger I'm no lawyer. On the surface, it seems different to have legislation about sending material privately from one party to another, and protected speech . For example, 18 U.S.C 1461 is specially about mailing this material. It would be not illegal based on this law to hand out flyers on the street, to say this stuff to another person, etc. Certainly it goes on all the times on the streets of Vegas. I think most people view forums and such as public speech (not sure that is a legal term, hopefully my meaning is clear) rather than something akin to mailing. For example, read the law(source) - you are not allowed to mail information about abortions! It's a really outdated law, I would think, in most people's mind, and we certainly wouldn't think that people should not be allowed to talk about abortion, or post about it on a forum. Yet, for some reason, you can't mail information about abortion. Again, I am no lawyer, but I read that as saying you can't mail information about planned parenthoood, or information about drugs that induce abortion, etc. I'm in agreement with you, our legal systems are definitely lagging behind how society views these things and I think your "...forums and such as public speech.." is why people are shocked to find it's being dealt with like say making a nuisance phone call. Yet saying that I suspect that if you ask someone over here in the UK should someone be prosecuted for say making nuisance phone calls (includes heavy breathing, obscene comments and the like) they would say yes. As ever society's mores are contradictory and ever so slightly incoherent!
	__________________ If it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart? - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn 1918-2008

13th September 2011, 08:36 AM	#18
roger Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2002 Location: Mountain View, CA Posts: 11,021	Originally Posted by Darat Yet saying that I suspect that if you ask someone over here in the UK should someone be prosecuted for say making nuisance phone calls (includes heavy breathing, obscene comments and the like) they would say yes. As ever society's mores are contradictory and ever so slightly incoherent! Hmm, interesting analogy, and I would agree with you. I'm trying to parse why I think so, and the main reason is it is a private mechanism, but I'm not sure how rational that is. I certainly don't feel I should be protected from somebody saying "you are an idiot" to me on the street or on this forum (I'm talking legally, not about the forum rules). Interesting.
	__________________ May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop off like autumn leaves. - John Muir

13th September 2011, 08:40 AM	#19
cwalner Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Deepest Darkest Indiana Posts: 5,708	When I first read the article, I misunderstood and thought that his posts were part of the bullying that led to the suicide, and found the sentence appropriate, if a bit light. Then as I read further, I realized that he made his posts to sites set up to memorialize young people who died prematurely and I realized he was just being a major league asshat. But as others have mentioned, in most western democracies, it is not against the law to be an asshat, so the jail does seem a bit extreme. Even so, I still find it difficult to muster up much sympathy for the guy.
	__________________ Vecini - Inconceivable! Inigo - You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

13th September 2011, 08:41 AM	#20
commandlinegamer Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mazes of Menace Posts: 5,908	Poison pen letter writers have been gaoled in the past: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...is-jailed.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-campaign.html
	__________________ He bade me take any rug in the house.

13th September 2011, 09:06 AM	#21
JJM 777 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Finland Posts: 3,175	Only 4 months? This guy was a (hint: Moby --) and needs something harsher to get to his senses. A year sounds better.

13th September 2011, 09:06 AM	#22
bluesjnr Professional Nemesis for Hire Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Not where I should be. Posts: 2,167	I'm torn, this sentence seems excessive yet I have to consider the upset this must have caused for the relatives of the girl and wonder if this factored in to the judges decision. What a sick thing to do and for what reason? This case is not isolated and perhaps this sentence will send a message to these "jokers".
	__________________ A baby smoking? That's child abuse - UncaYimmy Your avatar really cracked me up the first hundred or so times I saw it...Now, it gets on my nerves.. - Skeptical Greg

13th September 2011, 09:10 AM	#23
Babbylonian Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Lake Oswego, OR Posts: 4,499	It must be nice for the UK when they have enough space in jails to imprison people for being jerks. At least it seems like a better reason to jail someone than drug use.
	__________________ Where am I going to find a piece of metal? Here...in space...at this hour?

13th September 2011, 09:11 AM	#24
Skepticemea Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: London, UK Posts: 2,277	Originally Posted by JJM 777 Only 4 months? This guy was a (hint: Moby --) and needs something harsher to get to his senses. A year sounds better. I'm not sure 4 months in prison will stop this bloke being a complete tool. Will probably just introduce him to a few more of them.

13th September 2011, 09:41 AM	#25
Sabretooth No Ordinary Rabbit Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Wyoming, NY Posts: 6,163	Didn't some record store owner get jailed for selling gangsta-rap records in the early 90's? ETA: Yep, in 1990...http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/02/us...rew-album.html
	__________________ -------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit! Last edited by Sabretooth; 13th September 2011 at 09:48 AM.

13th September 2011, 09:46 AM	#26
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	Originally Posted by Sabretooth Didn't some record store owner get jailed for selling gangsta-rap records in the early 90's? . 2 Live Crew... in Florida.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_Live_Crew . I bought the "Nasty.." CD just because I can as an American. Have never and will never listen to it.

13th September 2011, 09:58 AM	#27
ServiceSoon Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 996	You'll really run a tight (authoritative) ship don't cha.
ServiceSoon Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 996

13th September 2011, 10:05 AM	#28
Darat Lackey Administrator / JREF Forum Liaison Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 64,803	Originally Posted by roger Hmm, interesting analogy, and I would agree with you. I'm trying to parse why I think so, and the main reason is it is a private mechanism, but I'm not sure how rational that is. I certainly don't feel I should be protected from somebody saying "you are an idiot" to me on the street or on this forum (I'm talking legally, not about the forum rules). Interesting. I've used the analogy with nuisance calls in a few conversations with people and it seems to generate the same conflict with most folk, it's a strange one.
	__________________ If it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart? - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn 1918-2008

13th September 2011, 10:42 AM	#29
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,628	Originally Posted by Monketey Ghost Do you mean by 'speech', speech? Why does anyone have to make a case for what they say? ~is my two cents. I think one can make the distinction between getting your kicks by harassing people and the intent of the Constitution in regards to the right to free speech.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

13th September 2011, 10:48 AM	#30
TubbaBlubba Knave of the Dudes Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Communist Kingdom of Sweden Posts: 7,415	I'm glad he's in jail, I just hope the slope isn't too slippery.
	__________________ Disagreement begets progress.

13th September 2011, 10:53 AM	#31
Architect Chief Punkah Wallah Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: UK Posts: 8,478	Quote: I think one can make the distinction between getting your kicks by harassing people and the intent of the Constitution in regards to the right to free speech. Or as the case may, the right to free speech is protected by the ECHR.
	__________________ When the men elected to make laws are but a small part of a foreign parliament, that is when all healthy national feeling dies. James Keir Hardie (1856 - 1915): Politician, Founder of Scottish Labour Party

13th September 2011, 10:53 AM	#32
Newtons Bit Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 6,917	Originally Posted by Sabretooth Didn't some record store owner get jailed for selling gangsta-rap records in the early 90's? ETA: Yep, in 1990...http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/02/us...rew-album.html I read up on that back-story and was amazed at the number of people back then were recently in the news. Jack Thompson, the now disbarred anti-video game crusader, was the man who started it all. Dr. Gates, Jr, the black man who was arrested by a white police officer for breaking into his own house and later sat down for a beer with said police officer and the President, testified in defense of the band when they were charged with obscenity. In the end, the appeals courts shut down the obscenity charges, however.
Newtons Bit Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 6,917	__________________ "Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein My website.

13th September 2011, 11:16 AM	#33
Rolfe Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: NT 150 511 Posts: 34,340	The perpetrator is being described on the news as having Asperger's syndrome. Rolfe.
	__________________ "The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

13th September 2011, 11:46 AM	#34
Didaktylos Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 400	I expect it would have been different if he had confined himself to ranting on his own blog/Facebook/Twitter.
	__________________ It's untrue that blokes can't multi-task: I can avoid doing any number of things simultaneously.

13th September 2011, 11:50 AM	#35
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,329	Originally Posted by Lamuella he's clearly a horrible person, but being a horrible person isn't enough for a jail sentence in my opinion. Speaking only for me - I think it's freakin' funny! Serves him right.
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau