padib said:
Kasz216 said:
padib said:
Kasz216 said:
padib said:
Kasz216 said:
sapphi_snake said:
Considering the writer of that article, his opinion doesn't deserve much attention.
|
So you judge opinions by seeing who makes them rather then the merit of said arguements.
|
Kasz, having read that article Toby Young makes a point that is: "Who can judge the subjectivity of offense". But a good comment at the bottom of the page sheds light on the objectivity of the matter:
"It's been mentioned, but I'll say it again. This is not a case of a troll. This is an evil kind of harassment, it is stalking, it is libel. These people stalk the parents of dead children to leave public messages that their murdered daughters were whores who deserved to die. These people steal pictures of crime scenes and anonymously pass them around and around and around, so whenever grieving parents go on the internet, there it is, yet again, a picture of their teenager's severed head, with more horrific comments concerning their dead child's lack of all worth and their having deserved to die. These are endlessly forwarded on, so the parents have no peace. It is harassment, it is stalking, and it is libel, all rolled into one."
True though, it does give a sense that people are less free to post the darker sides of their minds.
|
If it's libel, he should be sued for libel. If he stole pictures from crime scenes.... he should be prosecuted for stealing pictures of crime scenes.
|
1)Well, the commenter judged it as libel, you can agree or disagree. I personally agree that it is libel (which is defammation right?), though the laws in the UK fly miles over my head (I'm Canadian and not entrenched in law). Whether he is judged as that or not is a different story, and the verdict may or may not be the most just/true one. Not to say I discredit the verdict but again the poster may be right.
|
This would be like finding someone guilty of walking down the street, because he was walking down the street while wearing someone elses watch and talking with someone else about how they kill children.
It's utterly ridiculious... and sets a precedent that allows for the punishment of something that SHOULD be legally protected.
It's not stalking though. That's silly.
|
I think he was either mentioning facts that were ignored in the article, or relating to other instances where defamers were not incarcerated.
| Let alone letting your first "perp" be one with a diagnosed mental illness that specifically makes it harder for him to relate with others. (Aspergers.) |
He has Aspergers does he? A mental illness? I didn't read that but ok.
|
He wasn't charged with libel in the courts. So it's irrelevent.
|
It's not the court's verdict that strictly matters to us. Some of us like to ask questions like what would your verdict be, or do you think that's what he deserves, and such.
It's exactly the reason why this thread was created, to talk about it, and of course to show how dumb some people can be.
|
