So dies freedom of speech in the UK.
Two people have been jailed for sending abusive messages on Twitter to feminist campaigner Caroline Criado-Perez.
Isabella Sorley, 23, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, was sentenced to 12 weeks in prison and John Nimmo, 25, of South Shields, was jailed for eight weeks.
They had pleaded guilty at Westminster Magistrates’ Court to improper use of a communications network.
Clearly these two are vile – as vile as the little creep Dickie Doubleday (AKA Rickie) who once plagued this place with his verbal vandalism. But… They were just words on a screen. They did not cause harm. Yet our laws allow mere words on a screen to result in criminal prosecution and imprisonment. My God, what sort of third world totalitarian shit-hole as this country become? Yes, these two creeps are deeply repugnant – but not as nasty as those who decided that they should be prosecuted for uttering words, for offending the sensibilities of the recipients of their words – no matter how unpleasant those words were.
And, frankly, if these women were “terrified” because of these immature, puerile and stupid comments, then there is something seriously wrong with them. Whatever happened to having a spine?
From the article:
“When a producer from BBC Two’s Newsnight programme tracked Nimmo down after he had sent the abuse, the former call centre worker told him: ‘The police will do nothing, it’s only Twitter.'”
It’s funny, when the police shoot some worthless scumbag, the BBC make their disapproval known and act as agitators – happily giving the crook’s family airtime on both TV and radio.
But when some harmless, anti-social loner writes some naughty words they act as a bloodhound for the police
They’ll start pushing for even more regulation soon.
Scum.
RIP plain old common sense, too. Didn’t it ever occur to these women that anyone who publicly announces to the world that they are going to commit x or y or z criminal offence – naming both the intended offence and the intended victim in one and the same message – pretty much renders themselves incapable of carrying out said offence from the moment they press the “send” or “post” button on their keyboard? Serious, clever criminals never, ever, under any circumstances, announce their intended activities in advance. Those are the ones to be fearful of, not the ones who “play the ’ard man” from behind the safety of their computer screens.
Many years ago, in my mis-spent youth, I knew a “gentleman of the trade.” He informed me that the only criminals who ever got caught (he never had) were those who either (a) were stupid, (b) were cocky, (c) got too greedy, (d) acted out of emotion – in the “heat of the moment” if you like, or (e) occasionally, were just unlucky (though if they avoided the first four that was surprisingly rare). Admittedly, that was back in the days when you only got arrested and prosecuted for real crimes, not pretend ones like this. These days, crime just ain’t what it used to be … 😉
“Whatever happened to having a spine?”
As I keep asking, when did ‘I am woman, hear me roar!’ become ‘Protect me, Big Daddy State!’..?
When I read your comment,Julia, I immediately thought of thisimage from Ian Ironwood’s Pinterest page
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/b4/25/39/b42539f4abaab8621cd39db63946d231.jpg
Funny how women’s rights need the state to enforce them,with threats of violence or incarceration.
Before the internet people with an opinion literally would stand on their soap box in places like Hyde Park or Birmingham Bull Ring. I’m sure they probably got worse abuse that the twitter twits do and I’m equally sure that no one got sent to prison either.
Short term prison sentences can never be right surely? They must cost the public an awful lot to administer and for the ‘offender’ the ‘cost’ is also disproportionate, even a few weeks imprisonment could lead to automatic dismissal from their job. Is that good for society as a whole?
As for Caroline Criado-Perez, well having heard her in the many speaking opportunities that the BBC has gleefully offered her I conclude that she is mentally ill. Here is someone who is so upset that she ‘has’ to stop using Twitter but then finds she is ‘compelled’ to go back to using it. What sane person bothers which person from history is portrayed on our bank notes anyway?
Given that I don’t keep bank notes long enough to worry, I couldn’t give a fuck what the picture is.
I think the ones that are ciruclating on the internet with the image of the Duchess of Cambridge are pretty nifty. Why not use them.
So tweeting unpleasant empty threats to the righteous gets you a custodial sentence, but kicking a defenceless man in the head gets you a suspended sentence http://metro.co.uk/2014/01/24/thug-kicked-defenceless-man-in-the-head-like-a-football-as-he-tied-shoelaces-4275921/ . Makes you proud to be British.
Doesn’t it just?
Or going buglarising a bloke’s business to steal fuel and he defended himself robustly with a fence post. They got a pathetic £75 fine and he had 10 months of hell by being charged with GBH by the cops and prosecuted by the Criminal Protection Service. Fortunately a jury of 12 sane people took only 20 minutes to declare him not guilty. This is why we must resist government moves to restrict jury trials. This bloke got justice. If it was down to magistrates he would get law.
Dear Mr Longrider
The main purpose of government and its agents is to punish us.
They won’t be satisfied even when we’ve all got criminal records and their nice shiny and secure databases are filled with all our DNA and fingerprints, they’ll carry on doing it for pleasure and profit and the lucky ones will get to kill someone. Legally, of course.
DP