 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Stalkers Beware
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Tyke Date: 31 Jul 12 - 09:13 AM A 17-year-old has been arrested after malicious tweets were sent to Olympic diver Tom Daley. Dorset Police said the teenager was held at a guest house in Weymouth hours after 18-year-old Daley received the messages on social networking site Twitter. A police spokeswoman said: "A 17-year-old man was arrested by Dorset Police officers in the early hours this morning at a guest house in the Weymouth area on suspicion of malicious communications. He is currently helping police with their inquiries." Read it all here He is being held under the Malicious Communications Act 1998 This is particularly unpleasant form of harassment is that involving malicious communications either through the post, the telephone, Fax, by cyberstalking through the internet or, an increasing problem, by the use of Text or SMS messages sent to mobile phones. Under this legislation it is an offence to send an indecent, offensive or threatening letter, electronic communication or other article to another person and under section 43 Telecommunications Act 1984 it is a similar offence to send a telephone message which is indecent offensive or threatening. Both offences are punishable with up to six months imprisonment and/or a fine. Because the Malicious Communications Offence is wider ranging than the Telecommunications offence it is more likely to be charged by the Police than is the Telecommunications Act offence. This is Law in the UK |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp Date: 31 Jul 12 - 12:00 PM This is good. Along the same general lines, has anything been done to stop people from moonin' other people out the windows of passin' cars? There's been a lotta that around here lately, and it's becomin' a real nuisance. It's worst when Baboons do it, in my opinion. - Chongo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: GUEST,CS Date: 31 Jul 12 - 12:19 PM Arrested? FFS - a teenager posted one unpleasant comment on an internet site (twitter) - it wasn't as though he was stalking the guy or sending him death threats! There is a sensible line to be drawn between freedom of speech and serious malicious abuse. This wasn't that sensible line. I don't think he should have been arrested for the crime of posting what amounted to a lone unkind comment on a web site created for publicly posting comments. I guess because it's The Olympics, everyone's going into meltdown. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Date: 31 Jul 12 - 12:31 PM In this instance it does seem like a hysterical over-reaction and needless waste of police time and resources ??? and a very worrying precedent ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: akenaton Date: 31 Jul 12 - 01:59 PM Agree! very sensible comments from CS and PFR. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp Date: 31 Jul 12 - 02:18 PM Okay, yeah, they are overreactin' a bit in this case... But what about people moonin' other people from passin' cars? Should we turn a blind eye to that? - Chongo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: GUEST,CS Date: 31 Jul 12 - 02:46 PM Agree with Punkfolk - a worrying precedent indeed. Like I said - we're looking at an example of an unhealthy clampdown. Teenage jerks mouth-off all the time on the internet and elsewhere, it might not be big or clever, and maybe someone might get offended, but so long as their behaviour isn't actually seriously stalky, I don't want the kind of fascist state which locks them up for it. After all, as the song sez, it'll be me next. And while we're at it finger's crossed Equador will provide Julian Assange asylum he needs and deserves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 31 Jul 12 - 08:45 PM ""It's worst when Baboons do it, in my opinion."" Dunno about that Chongo mate. I feel their hearts aren't in it, innit? They're always red arsed with embarrassment! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 31 Jul 12 - 09:01 PM Only a warning given. Sheesh! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: ollaimh Date: 31 Jul 12 - 09:49 PM i like the law. if it catched the odd teen too stupid to be responsible with his tweets then he will learn not to threaten or lie on the internet. some people lose any sense of decency when hiding behind a computer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Tyke Date: 01 Aug 12 - 12:54 PM Having read some of the comments I am not surprised that some people think that cyber and text bullies are not a problem. I wonder what the suicide rate is amongst school children who have suffered this abuse and how many have stopped going to school because of it. Schools seem to be paying lip service to the problem and failing to educate their pupils of the utter devastation that bulling can cause. If this was nipped in the bud this teenager might have though better of his actions. However I have to say that I have always found the saying about if this happens or that happens "I'll show my bottom in Woolworths Window" quite descriptive and amusing. While Chaucer prefer the insertion of a red hot poker into those Bottoms he found poking out of windows. Never the less I still believe that Malicious Communications are particularly unpleasant form of harassment is that involving malicious communications either through the post, the telephone, Fax, by cyber stalking through the internet or, an increasing problem, by the use of Text or SMS messages sent to mobile phones. I would like to sugest a like button to click on like you can do on Facebook for the Mudcat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Aug 12 - 01:05 PM It appears from rumours circulating internet chat that the teenager in question may be a nasty little shit with a track record for previous far more malicious racist abuse and death threats ??? other rumours are that he is desperately in need of mental health attention. If any of this is true then it's obvious the kid needs taking to one side by the proper authorities before his behaviour escalates. In which case some good may come of this ? However it seems his alleged previous far worse internet 'crimes' have so far gone undetected and punished, while all hell has suddenly broke loose and the laws onto him like a tone of bricks now because this time he targeted a current popular British sports celebrity..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 Aug 12 - 01:11 PM Good comments, Tyke. Young people, immature and sensitive to the opinions of others, are easily harassed by cyber bullying and stalking. The Malicious Communications Act served its purpose in this case. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 01 Aug 12 - 01:34 PM i like the law. if it catched the odd teen too stupid to be responsible with his tweets then he will learn not to threaten or lie on the internet. some people lose any sense of decency when hiding behind a computer But in this case he was not threatening, nor was there a lie involved. The statement in the tweet was not a representation of fact known to be false and intended to be relied on as truth (a lie). Dave Oesterreich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: ollaimh Date: 01 Aug 12 - 02:03 PM well he was a perfect young gentleman. cowardly people will do anything to help a bully |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Tyke Date: 01 Aug 12 - 02:05 PM I would have thought that if you had spent years training to fullfill your dreams of a Gold Medal in the the Olimpics you would feel bad enough. To then recive a tweet or anything else that was calculated to hurt you would I would say was Malicious truth or lies. If a child is taunted by somone Texting that he or she was a Bastad it might not be a lie and these days to most people would mean nothing to most people these days. But if that child is unable to take it as a compliment and the sender knows it. It is Malicious! If you lie and say that somone has taken drugs to enhance thier performance that is Malicius and even when this is proved to be a lie still has a malicious act that somone has to live with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Bill D Date: 01 Aug 12 - 02:58 PM "It's worst when Baboons do it, in my opinion."" Can YOU say ischial collosity? ---------------------------------------------------------- We've had, relatively, only a few years to adapt the human psyche to the latitude the internet/WWW gives to aberrant persons. I really wonder if it is even possible to make societal 'rules' that will make most people refrain from offensive 'tweets' and emails.... and posts in fora... (or forums, if you choose) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: GUEST,CS Date: 01 Aug 12 - 03:03 PM The kid (in this instance) wasn't stalking, wasn't lying, wasn't carrying out a campaign of harassement, wasn't swearing at, and wasn't threatening anyone. One comment made in poor taste, should not be sufficient cause for arrest, however many unhealthily delicate souls there may be out there. In fact if someone is so fragile as to break down as the consequence of one unkind comment, I'd swiftly recommend medication or retiring to a retreat free from human communications altogether. God forbid that our freedom of speech should be curtailed for fear of upsetting a few hyper fragile souls. Put it in perspective. People say unkind things to others on this forum ALL THE TIME - just check the mass bitching and abuse hurled at anyone expressing unpopular opinions on here. Maybe Mudcatters be arrested for saying unkind things now? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: GUEST,CS Date: 01 Aug 12 - 03:14 PM PS: I recognise there are many serious cases of cyber stalking and campaigns of abuse that have been and are being conducted virtually - those are the cases that need tackling, not passing comments to sports celebrities. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 Aug 12 - 03:36 PM The person was not arrested, but was warned. The Malicious Communications Act is useful deterrence. I don't think we have a similar act in Canada, but malicious comments are actionable under Canadian libel, slander, and defamation of Character Law. Actionable: "My neighbor John Smith is a stinking lush" This is defamatory: an unproven, malicious statement about a private individual. Not actionable: "My neighbour, John Smith drank ten glasses of whiskey last night at the local pub. In my opinion he's an alcoholic." Fact is separated from opinion, no clear evidence of malice, would depend on proof that he drank ca. ten glasses. Paraphrased from http://www.canadianlawsite.ca/libel-slander-defamation-of-%20character.htm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Tyke Date: 01 Aug 12 - 05:57 PM Mabe they will Guest CS I don't think the Malicious Communications Act 1998 is just in place to protect celebraties. Not much we do today cannot be traced and or Photographed. Thier is always a trail offenders will and can be caught. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Stalkers Beware From: Richard Bridge Date: 01 Aug 12 - 06:02 PM Damn - I'm going to have to agree with Olly again! |
