Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:06 PM Dec 2014

UK man arrested for tweeting tasteless joke about Glasgow tragedy (no First Amendment there)

A man has been arrested over an offensive tweet about the bin lorry crash in Glasgow in which six people died and ten were injured.

The posting was reported just before 21:00 GMT on Monday and deleted a short time later, police said.

A 19-year-old man from Sunderland handed himself into police on Monday evening and was arrested on suspicion of making a malicious communication.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-30585301


Yes, it was an offensive and tasteless joke, but should someone be criminally prosecuted for this?

The tweet said: "So a bin lorry has apparently driven in 100 people in Glasgow eh, probably the most trash it's picked up in one day".

The arrested man, believed to be Ross Loraine, from Sunderland, handed himself in to Northumbria Police.

The force said he was arrested on suspicion of making a malicious communication and had been bailed while they investigated.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/12/23/glasgow-crash-tweet_n_6371428.html


18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

DrDan

(20,411 posts)
1. here is the law he was arrested for - Malicious Communication Act 1988
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:23 PM
Dec 2014

Offence of sending letters etc. with intent to cause distress or anxiety.

(1) Any person who sends to another person—

(a) a letter, electronic communication or article of any description] which conveys—

(i) a message which is indecent or grossly offensive;

(ii) a threat; or

(iii) information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender; or

(b) any article or electronic communication] which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature,

is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/27

nichomachus

(12,754 posts)
2. Sounds reasonable to me
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:36 PM
Dec 2014

The license to publish or broadcast fear, hate, racism, denigration, ridicule, personal attack, whatever that has marked "discourse" in the US for the last couple of decades has pretty much brought the country to its knees. It has become an ugly place.

nichomachus

(12,754 posts)
7. This has nothing to do with the First Amendment
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:54 PM
Dec 2014

The First Amendment says only that the government cannot prevent you, a priori, from having your say, but you can be held accountable for what you say. If I were to go online and identify you as a child molester, even though you''re not, you could sue me and you would probably win.


Just today, in fact, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that cyber harassment is not protected under the first amendment.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2014/12/23/mass-high-court-rules-cyber-harassment-not-protected-speech/Yj9z70lzwDpXn3vpmUpjfO/story.html?p1=Topofpage:sub_headline_3

True Blue Door

(2,969 posts)
8. The logic of which has dangerous implications.
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:56 PM
Dec 2014

For instance, charging someone with "incitement" for wearing a "Can't Breathe" t-shirt.

nichomachus

(12,754 posts)
10. Probably no more dangerous than
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:03 PM
Dec 2014

The non-stop spewing of poison by the right-wing noise machine. It has brought the country close to ruin.

This is not anything close to what the Founders had in mind -- just as the current gun insanity here isn't what they had in mind by the Second Amendment.

The Constitution is in serious need of repair, except that the constant spewing of hate speech by the corporatist hate mongers -- hiding behind the First Amendment -- will probably prevent that from happening.

True Blue Door

(2,969 posts)
11. And who do you think would do the "repairing"?
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:15 PM
Dec 2014

You, or the very lobbyists who have poisoned the existing Constitution?

msongs

(67,421 posts)
13. and who will be the decider as to what is any of those things, you or people who do
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 07:02 PM
Dec 2014

not like or agree with you?

 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
3. Nothing can match American freedumbz
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:38 PM
Dec 2014

The freedumb to have thousands of gun deaths every year...

Yeee Hawwww!!

hack89

(39,171 posts)
18. Absolutely. Civil liberties are over rated
Wed Dec 24, 2014, 12:47 PM
Dec 2014

The government needs the power to restrict them to the social good.

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
16. I don't know. Perhaps the police will speak to his friends and colleagues first,
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 07:09 PM
Dec 2014

to see if he has a habit of making tasteless offensive jokes in pubs and in his workplace, before they determine his punishment.

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
14. No one should ever be arrested for expressing an assholish opinion.
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 07:03 PM
Dec 2014

Too much shit has been criminalized in this country already. And besides, you know damn well who would be deciding what is "offensive." Further, there is no "right to not be offended." Thankfully.

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
15. There are plenty of Southern Christian District Attorneys
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 07:08 PM
Dec 2014

who would just LOVE to be able to arrest people for "blaspheming Jesus Christ". Not least because it would guarantee their reelection.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»UK man arrested for tweet...