R2OK! Forum Index R2OK!
Contact R2OK! admin

Click here for R2OK! Website


 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Celebrities Support Twitter Joker.

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    R2OK! Forum Index -> News and Current Affairs
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mark occomore



Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 9955
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:28 pm    Post subject: Celebrities Support Twitter Joker. Reply with quote

Quote:
A man found guilty of sending a 'menacing' tweet about a South Yorkshire airport has returned to court with the backing of top comedians to try to overturn his conviction.


http://news.sky.com/story/953308/comics-in-court-to-support-twitter-joke-man

______________________

Depends how people take a joke and how it's written?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Schizoidman



Joined: 20 Sep 2010
Posts: 1138
Location: Rural West Sussex

PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the conviction should stand. The Communications Act refers to a 'menacing act'. Threatening to 'blow the airport sky high' is fairly menacing I'd have thought.
These 'celebs' should mind their own business.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mark occomore



Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 9955
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He said it in jest and didn't literally mean it. How do you justify a joke compared to going too commit the crime? I've heard people saying " I'm going to kill you " - they don't mean it. So we all should be careful what we say in case we are taken to court.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FleetingEileenM



Joined: 30 Mar 2010
Posts: 5163
Location: Hampshire

PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Schizoidman, I agree with you. There COULD have been serious intent behind his so-called joke and in these terrorist-sensitive times it was a stupid thing to do.

As for those "celebs" ... Rolling Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John W



Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 3360
Location: Warwickshire, UK

PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mark occomore wrote:
He said it in jest and didn't literally mean it. How do you justify a joke compared to going too commit the crime? I've heard people saying " I'm going to kill you " - they don't mean it. So we all should be careful what we say in case we are taken to court.


Yeah Mark but people do kill other people when they don't mean it - that's manslaughter, so shall we make that OK too?

Like, 'I was driving round the estate at 60 mph just for a laugh, I didn't see the old lady crossing the road.'

I'm sure you'd agree to prosecute him.

Now, this fellow posted on twitter about blowing up an airport, you think that was fun. What if he phoned the airport to say the same thing. Ah that's different is it?
_________________
-
John W
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ian Robinson
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 3424
Location: Chorley, Lancashire

PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

John W wrote:
What if he phoned the airport to say the same thing. Ah that's different is it?

Of course it's different. What a ridiculous thing to say, John.

This prosecution is ridiculous, a waste of time and money and the unfair persecution of someone who made a flip remark on the internet. We've all done that and in this case it was very clearly a joke (albeit one in bad taste).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ColinB
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And to think that such cases could potentially become more numerous once Big Brother has the power to scan the contents of all our electronic communications.
Back to top
ruddlescat



Joined: 16 Sep 2010
Posts: 18010
Location: Near Chester

PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ColinB wrote:
And to think that such cases could potentially become more numerous once Big Brother has the power to scan the contents of all our electronic communications.


That is exactly why these snooping proposals have to be stopped and I for one am strongly opposed to them
_________________
Are you ready for a Ruddles?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John W



Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 3360
Location: Warwickshire, UK

PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 10:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian Robinson wrote:
John W wrote:
What if he phoned the airport to say the same thing. Ah that's different is it?

Of course it's different. What a ridiculous thing to say, John.

This prosecution is ridiculous, a waste of time and money and the unfair persecution of someone who made a flip remark on the internet. We've all done that and in this case it was very clearly a joke (albeit one in bad taste).


But if he had phoned the airport that would have been a joke too, yes?

Yes, because he has no bomb-making equipment, but the phone-call would lead to prosecution, so why not the twitter comment?

OK we can make bad jokes or 'flippant' comments in conversation, but to PUBLISH a bad joke with menacing content, surely there is a responsibilty there, knowing how offensive it is or how it might alert real concern.

To say 'I am going to blow up the airport' is different from saying 'I'd like to blow up the airport but I don't have the means to do so' and lawyers may argue successfully that difference.
_________________
-
John W
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mark occomore



Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 9955
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Twitter is random speaking like you would be with a group of mates in a pub or at work. Just it's a moment of madness when you are on your own. It depends how people judge the context. Although it was a stupid act saying what he did - as someone may have thought he was a Terrorist.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ian Robinson
Site Admin


Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 3424
Location: Chorley, Lancashire

PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John W wrote:
Ian Robinson wrote:
John W wrote:
What if he phoned the airport to say the same thing. Ah that's different is it?

Of course it's different. What a ridiculous thing to say, John.

This prosecution is ridiculous, a waste of time and money and the unfair persecution of someone who made a flip remark on the internet. We've all done that and in this case it was very clearly a joke (albeit one in bad taste).


But if he had phoned the airport that would have been a joke too, yes?

Yes, because he has no bomb-making equipment, but the phone-call would lead to prosecution, so why not the twitter comment?

OK we can make bad jokes or 'flippant' comments in conversation, but to PUBLISH a bad joke with menacing content, surely there is a responsibilty there, knowing how offensive it is or how it might alert real concern.

To say 'I am going to blow up the airport' is different from saying 'I'd like to blow up the airport but I don't have the means to do so' and lawyers may argue successfully that difference.

But he didn't make a phone call. He made a comment to his followers - who presumably knew his sense of humour. It wasn't a message for the authorities to take seriously, or he'd have contacted them direct.

This displays a simple misunderstanding of how Twitter works.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
John W



Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 3360
Location: Warwickshire, UK

PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian Robinson wrote:
But he didn't make a phone call. He made a comment to his followers - who presumably knew his sense of humour. It wasn't a message for the authorities to take seriously, or he'd have contacted them direct.

This displays a simple misunderstanding of how Twitter works.


No. Of course the message wasn't sent 'to the authorities', a terrorist would not do that, he wants his attack to succeed. Someone posting on twitter can have his attack planned and tweet at the last moment. That method was demonstrated during last year's riots.

Last year's riots demonstrated that menacing tweets cannot be ignored, and they have been used to prosecute rioters.
_________________
-
John W
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ColinB
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mark occomore wrote:
Twitter is random speaking like you would be with a group of mates in a pub or at work.


I disagree. What is disseminated via Twitter is hardly limited to the equivalent of "a few mates in a pub at work". It's out there in the public domain and available for all to see if they're subscribing to your feed.

Anyway, it's no real surprise that the government wants the right of access to every aspect of our electronic (and non-electronic) communication. That way we really will be under the control of Big Brother.

Not far off now. Make the most of what few freedoms you still have folks. Those who say "It doesn't bother me because I have nothing to hide" are being unbelievably naive.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    R2OK! Forum Index -> News and Current Affairs All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group. Hosted by phpBB.BizHat.com