Man Jailed for 3 months over Facebook Jokes

[Cheery Lunatic]

Ok I know I'm not the only one who read the article just to find out what the jokes were.

I hate ill humored jokes as much as the next guy but I mean c'mon. How bad does a joke have to be to get arrested for it, jesus.

 

[Loonyyy]

Bad. Very very bad. Determining things to be offensive or obscene is a standard form of censorship. Britain had a lot of that with blasphemy and obscenity laws previously, used to protect puritanical primarily Christian values from those they disapproved of. And it was terrible. This is a step backwards.

The man should be free to say what he likes, and let everyone know what a despicable piece of scum, or stupid moronic troll, he really is.

 

[Some_weirdGuy]

This is disgusting.

Judges are meant to be professional and unbiased...

 

[Athol]

I think more people should do jailtime for bad humour. Maybe this would finally improve some TV shows...

Do you think we could get the death sentance for Dane Cook? (A man can dream...)

 

[Darks63]

You know I'm torn on this one. On one hand i like freedom of speech and don't like it to be violated(yes i know this happened in England not murica), but on the other i do so like seeing someone punished for trolling bad trolling at that.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

I think it's f***ed up. On Facebook, even more than a lot of other places, you have the option NOT to look at something you think is distasteful. I don't care how bad his jokes were, he has a right to say them. Especially if it was his own page, but sadly the article is less than clear about this. You can mark comments as spam or abuse, if you own a page you can delete them, I think it's ridiculous to lock someone up for commenting.

 

[GTwander]

I think it's f***ed up. On Facebook, even more than a lot of other places, you have the option NOT to look at something you think is distasteful. I don't care how bad his jokes were, he has a right to say them. Especially if it was his own page, but sadly the article is less than clear about this. You can mark comments as spam or abuse, if you own a page you can delete them, I think it's ridiculous to lock someone up for commenting.

Seriously...
If anything, he is only deserving of a fine for having to get police to save his ass from an angry mob, nothing more. This sets a very bad precedent for the future of the UK. Wouldn't be surprised if the next step is locking people up for badmouthing politicians.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

There is so much I don't understand about this. Maybe I'm missing it because I'm sick. What crime was this guy even charged with? Why did they arrest him and not the mob that attacked him? The whole thing certainly smells shitty but I need more facts.

 

[DANEgerous]

Seriously... it is goddamn Facebook, just block the dumbfuck once he insults you, put you profile on private, simply stop using Facebook. No only is this jailing a person for what they said but it jailing a person for what they said when their "target" had intent to read it.

Can't we just ignore assholes? What happened to the time we could just expect that a lot of people are assholes and just ignore said people? I did throughout my whole school career and it was only 2005 when that ended. It is sad I was a nerdy little ***** to most people i was insulted and i ignored the insults today this is apparently the mark of a total badass akin to shrugging off bullet wounds when it is just behaving like a civilized human being.

 

[Sandjube]

I think it is good...

It serves as a deterrent for other people who think that mediums like the internet can be used to cause others hurt and misfortune...

I don't mind trolling... but I do mind when the comments are seriously aimed to hurt other people when they are already upset... hell... aimed to hurt anybody is horrible!

It is inconsiderate and generally horrible... so I am glad someone has been made an example of...

Also... Private page? This is the internet... there is no such thing!

I just had to point out that you use '...' a lot. I dunno why I had to point it out, and I'm not saying it's a bad thing...I do it heaps myself. I just had to remark upon it. *shrug*

OT: Well...I have mixed feelings. Sometimes I have really thought to myself "Man, that guy is a dick, he deserves some sort of punishment for that", but I don't think I've ever really meant it.

 

[el_kabong]

I don't say this very often. I'm glad I live in the United States. Where a person's right to be an insensitive asshole is protected by the law rather than impeded by mob rule.

 

[Nouw]

Uhh.....maybe I am missing something, maybe I fell into a coma and I have been out for a while, but when did we start handing out sentences, not on the severity of the crime, but based on the amount of outrage from the public?

Also, he is also charged with child abduction? What the hell is that about?

No, like, genuinely, there is no mention of child abduction in that article except for the two words, "child abduction".

That, I believe, was someone else. Mark Bridger is the criminal and Matthew Woods is the 'criminal' who posted offensive material on Facebook. Mark Bridger has been charged with the abduction and murder of April Jones, and Matthew Woods has been charged with...well you know, upsetting people and almost being the victim of an angry mob. Once again people, what about the angry mob? Am I crazy here?

 

[poxyrom]

I can't develop an opinion if I don't know what he said.

 

[Treblaine]

I don't have a problem with this per-se... but I do have a problem with the very idea of the police using their power to decide what people can and cannot say with the power to arrest and imprison people it is bound to end in abuse and innocent people in court and some of them being unduly punished or at least costing a lot in time and legal bills.

See, I think we (Britain) have forgotten WHY Freedom of Speech is so important and it's not to protect jerks like him, it's to protect people like YOU! You who doesn't have to worry about making a risqué private comment that the thought police will deem inappropriate. Only the most serious offences like holding a KKK style Rally calling for genocide or criminal insurrection should be stopped with imprisonment.

Even for this jerk, the appropriate response to such infractions should not be imprisonment, he is not a danger to society, he is not a thief who constantly steals things, a vandal who breaks things, the problem was him using the internet, ban him from using the internet for posting any public comments on the internet for 6 months.

The hurt of his comments will sting for a day or two before they wear off as just idle words, but the suffering of a 3 month prison sentence both in the short term and long term on his employment prospects is totally disproportionate to the harm done. Prison can only make a young man like this worse.

How does the government kidnapping and imprisoning someone for 3 months prove the moral high ground here? It's not like this was the only way to stop or reprimand him. Ban from the internet for a time with the threat of prison is far more appropriate but even then it was a few comments that weren't even directed to the bereaved but just semi-public. I mean just because you can overhear someone in a pub doesn't mean they can be held to the standard of a broadcaster.

What is it with our courts:
-Calling armed burglars "courageous"
-Double-talk on appropriate use of force in home-invasion
-Refusing to press charges against police who kill civilians in dodgy circumstances
-The most Plaintiff-Friendly lawsuit courts IN THE WORLD! The Libel-law mecca for the rich to silence poor critics

 

[dumbseizure]

Uhh.....maybe I am missing something, maybe I fell into a coma and I have been out for a while, but when did we start handing out sentences, not on the severity of the crime, but based on the amount of outrage from the public?

Also, he is also charged with child abduction? What the hell is that about?

No, like, genuinely, there is no mention of child abduction in that article except for the two words, "child abduction".

That, I believe, was someone else. Mark Bridger is the criminal and Matthew Woods is the 'criminal' who posted offensive material on Facebook. Mark Bridger has been charged with the abduction and murder of April Jones, and Matthew Woods has been charged with...well you know, upsetting people and almost being the victim of an angry mob. Once again people, what about the angry mob? Am I crazy here?

Ahh after re-reading the article, your right about who is being charged with what.

But my god, would it kill someone to word that just a LITTLE bit better?!

 

[Treblaine]

Why did they arrest him and not the mob that attacked him?

I read in The Times they initially "took him into custody for his own protection" and when the mob continued to be a threat they promptly decided he was the criminal and charged him after they lured him to the station saying they were taking him there to protect him.

British Police, supposedly the best in the world, though this reminds me of history class where we learned about racism in America's deep south how an angry mob would demand revenge on one individual who offended them.

As offensive as any comments are, I'd say threatening someone so much that they have to be protected by the police is far more offensive. It is the definition of "offence" not the nebulous one of "I hear someone somewhere in the world wasn't duly deferential to the depressing issue".

 

[Nouw]

Ahh after re-reading the article, your right about who is being charged with what.

But my god, would it kill someone to word that just a LITTLE bit better?!

Yeah, it's a really poorly structured article for people like us that have no idea who April Jones is.