Trolls can now be sent to prison

[sapphi_snake]

padib said:

I see what you mean. The case in question is the judgement of the guy for cyber-trolling post-mortem. Okay. But you fail to realize that the article also mentions the bullying and seems to blur out the fact that he wasn't responsible for the pre-mortem bullying at all. He was just a troll towards the parents and those who mourned. The whole article revolved around the story of a girl, and collateral to that you have some troll who gets put to jail for trolling after her death.

As alby said, if 

"It's time that stopping bullying at the source is placed higher on the government's agenda."

and

"Sherry Adhami, of the charity Beatbullying, said: 'Today's ruling is a monumental move towards bullying and cyberbullying being taken more seriously and sends a strong message to society that bullying, whether online or offline, is not going to be tolerated.' "

then the true bullies are not being dealt with, and the article shows a gross lack of justice at hand.

 

It's not because we're not following what you're used to hearing that it makes our interest in the topic irrational. You can judge it irrelevant at the very best maybe, but even then I just don't agree. Something happened to a person, someone was punished for it and is being framed by media as the main source of bullying, it's vague, it's unclear and so it's easy to bridge his post-mortem bullying with that of the girls, at least media-wise. Remember, this post is based off of a news article.

What it leaves us with is a false sence of justice that bullying is made away with, but the true bullying was completely disregarded. I don't know what to say else than that.

Is the article somehow suggesting that he was responsible for the pre-death bullying? Because I did not get that at all. The girl herself is only mentioned at the beginning of the article, and then they go on about this guy's actions regarding the girl's family, and similar offences he commited at other people's memorial sites. Those quotes refer to the case at hand (harassing the girls' parents), so the 'true bully' in this case is the accused. He is the main source of bullying in this case.

He is not blamed for the girl commiting suicide. Actually, the girl commiting suicide has nothing to do with the case at hand.

If you wanna go off topic with the punishing of those girls, you're free to do that. But don't trey to merge your off topic issue with the main topic. The judge who was trying this case (the harassment of the girls' parents by the accused), had no logical reason to care what happened to the girl, that she was bullied etc., because it had nothing to do with the case he was trying. The media was reporting mainly about this guy, because he was the main party involved in the case. They did another full article regarding Natasha (things like this tend to make the news), where they talked about how she was bullied by those girls, but since no one knows what was in Natasha's head, no one knows what was the main factor that drove her to commit suicide. No one also knows if the bullying she experienced was at the same level at this guy was doing, thus it's unknown if the girl clique could even be prosecuted.

A bully was prosecuted. Prosecuting such individuals is hard, because proof for conviction is hard to come by, and victims often don't speak up. Even in non-criminal cases, schools often don't have efficient rules regarding the punishment of bullies.