4 months for "Trolling"

[Roadtoad]

Fred Phelps pickets the funeral of an American soldier. It's repulsive, but under the law, we allow it. I don't see too much of a difference here, save for the location.

As to his having Asperger's, so what? This was over the top, even for someone with that condition.

 

[Architect]

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.

..in America. But criminal in much of Europe. There you go. We make our laws, you make yours.

 

[Alt+F4]

..in America. But criminal in much of Europe. There you go. We make our laws, you make yours.

Indeed. According to the OP link, "sending indecent or offensive communications" is illegal in the UK. The fool got what he deserved.

 

[cwalner]

..in America. But criminal in much of Europe. There you go. We make our laws, you make yours.

Fair enough, I guess it would have been better stated as 'should not be criminal'. I actually agree with the US law in this case.

 

[Matthew Best]

This guy was a (hint: Moby --)

He was a bald bespectacled musician?

 

[cwalner]

He was a bald bespectacled musician?

No, we refer to them as Hrabs.

 

[Architect]

Fair enough, I guess it would have been better stated as 'should not be criminal'. I actually agree with the US law in this case.

I'm afraid I don't, as I class it in the same category as hate mail through the post. The question is perhaps whether the length of sentence is appropriate - seems steep to me, but without having seen more details etc etc.

 

[Rolfe]

I would probably have favoured a community service, if at all possible. Get him in contact with actual people rather than a computer screen, and grow some empathy. But maybe he's too antisocial to be foisted on the unsuspecting community.

Rolfe.

 

[Alt+F4]

The question is perhaps whether the length of sentence is appropriate - seems steep to me, but without having seen more details etc etc.

Well according to the article he was cautioned for a similar offense in 2009, that could be the reason for the jail time.

 

[WildCat]

Reading man jailed for "trolling"

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

Hah, that pic is exactly what I picture trolls looking like!

And the thought police can go screw themselves.

 

[lionking]

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

Rolfe.

Which is a mitigating factor in my opinion. I think some sort of community service order (do you have them in the UK?) would have been appropriate.

 

[Rolfe]

Yeah, that's what I thought too. Prison is likely just to make him worse I imagine.

Rolfe.

 

[John Albert]

I'm guessing the judge sentenced him to 4 months in prison just "for the lulz."

 

[stevea]

The nice thing about this thread is that so many closed-minded anti-freedom totalitarians self-identify.

How can anyone justify the position that calling a dead person some names and making a vid to ridicule them is a CRIMINAL offense and deserves incarceration ? If I do the same to Dick Nixon should I be jailed ?

If the family is actually harmed then they have a cause for CIVIL action. To make it a criminal matter is amazingly backward - knuckle-dragging.

The only sense in which "freedom" is a meaningful concept is that we allow others the right to do what we would not do, what we find objectionable, what we find offensive. We need to assert rights only to do unpopular things. So IMO anyone unwilling to accept that this guy was rude yet within his rights is anti-freedom. As with the porn/mail topic we always have some population of small-minded anti-freedom people who want to enforce their views on others to the detriment of legitimate freedoms. Totalitarians,

To make this a criminal rather than a civil matter is to claim the act is harmful to society at large - and not just to the individual/family, I don't see that at all. The guy didn't foment a riot nor scream fire in a crowded theater. It's just offensive speech, categorically similar to the stuff on this forum. No general harm at all.

What is next in the prissy overly-sensitive totalitarian regime some here prefer ? Shall we jail people who use the wrong Indian/Native_American/First_Nation term ? Shall we lock people up if they believe that inoculations cause autism. Why not tax and jail people who reject evolution, or maybe the death penalty for rejecting global warming ? Clearly many find these ideas objectionable too.

No - speech should be protected. The only exceptions are speech that cause harm directly.

 

[Rolfe]

I'm guessing the judge sentenced him to 4 months in prison just "for the lulz."

I don't know. Why don't you go ask him?

I speculated that it could be the man was so antisocial that it wouldn't have been fair to foist him on the unsuspecting "community".

Rolfe.

 

[stevea]

Indeed. According to the OP link, "sending indecent or offensive communications" is illegal in the UK. The fool got what he deserved.

So then this forum is illegal in the UK ? Certainly some parts are offensive.
To say offensive speech his illegal is equivalent to saying freedom of speech is illegal.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

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

I wasn't being USA-centric, my particular comment followed: "Surely would be protected speech here in the US."

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Fred Phelps pickets the funeral of an American soldier. It's repulsive, but under the law, we allow it. I don't see too much of a difference here, save for the location.

As to his having Asperger's, so what? This was over the top, even for someone with that condition.

I don't see it as part of Asperger's either. But it does seem to be some kind of behavioral disorder.

I'm trying to get a grasp on the concepts here. Phelps is a mental case, but his disgusting speech has a purpose in his mind. This guy seems to have mental problems but the disgusting speech appears to have no particular meaning other than he'e getting a personal jolly out of it. Maybe there is less difference than I think, but something seems conceptually different about the two behaviors.

 

[Roadtoad]

I don't see it as part of Asperger's either. But it does seem to be some kind of behavioral disorder.

I'm trying to get a grasp on the concepts here. Phelps is a mental case, but his disgusting speech has a purpose in his mind. This guy seems to have mental problems but the disgusting speech appears to have no particular meaning other than he'e getting a personal jolly out of it. Maybe there is less difference than I think, but something seems conceptually different about the two behaviors.

True enough. And as Rolfe points out, the judge may have felt this guy was so far out of line he couldn't be left alone in polite society.

Keep in mind, we're dealing with an entirely different legal system. This is obviously not going to be handled in the same way as it would here, and England is taking a far harsher view of this than I could, simply because we protect speech here, even if it's offensive. (I'd still like to slug the little worm, but that's another matter.)

More to come, I'm sure. This guy might be kept out of social media for a while, but I question whether he'd be kept entirely quiet.

 

[Alt+F4]

So then this forum is illegal in the UK ? Certainly some parts are offensive.

I don't know. The OP link didn't specifiy if "sending indecent or offensive communications" has to originate in the UK for it to be illegal.

To say offensive speech is illegal is equivalent to saying freedom of speech is illegal.

It is illegal in the UK in this case, if that is right or wrong is a separate issue.