Forums Forums National News Jailed for trolling?

It's just very stupid of the BBC (or anyone else) to call this "trolling" - because this wasn't trolling.

Trolling isn't illegal (regrettably, perhaps!!), whereas "sending a communication of an indecent or offensive nature" absolutely (and quite properly, IMNSHO) is...

Jail = public protection

Not if prisoners get internet access?
Seems like some do: Click

Hmmm true, still seems silly to me, as it didn't lead to anything other than a bit of upset by the family. Persistant harassment causing someone to kill themselves is a bit different I think. I don't know, probably cos it says 'trolling' in the title I'm just seeing as that and not what it really is

[/quote] Hmmm true, still seems silly to me, as it didn't lead to anything other than a bit of upset by the family. Persistant harassment causing someone to kill themselves is a bit different I think. I don't know, probably cos it says 'trolling' in the title I'm just seeing as that and not what it really is [/quote]

BIT of upset??

Are you a parent? Its a whole different world once you become a parent! Years ago before the birth of my child I may of questioned the choice of punishment here (maybe in favour of whipping?) but feeling empathy for the parents who have lost their children, only for some piece of crap to defame the tribute given to them, I KNOW that they would of been more than upset, probably mortified and deeply pained, and for that the violator should be named, shamed, imprisoned for a short enough amount of time for the public to remember him when he becomes free!

Trolling sounds a rather jolly name to describe such an evil horrendous thing that this man has been found guilty of. Its a bit like calling yobs joy riders , they cause no joy in anyway to the people who they hurt during their pursuit of their so called joy.

True that!

i agree with you Janazca,its a joyride they love the thrill off it. Sick but true in their case!!

What this individual did was sick & deserves the punishment given, maybe he could spend that 18 weeks thinking what upset he has caused to his victims. Got to say though, it will be very difficult to police an internet ban.

"Trolling" is a hi-jacked word that originally means "a manner of fishing from a very slow-moving boat". In internet parlance, it is exactly that, such people are "fishing" for replies to their deliberately "contentious" posts. (Yes I am an internet oldie, I've been on it since the early 80s and this term originates from the old "UUNET" Newsgroups. "There's nothing new that's under the Sun" as they say...!)
As I have said before, Trolling is all done for the benefit of the Troll - they get a perverse thrill out of seeing other people responding to the "bait". What this person did was in no way, shape or form amywhere close to "Trolling", it went WAY BEYOND it...!!

Although distasteful and not something most of us would consider doing, we are creeping further and further in to the world of the 'thought police'.

Without diminishing the parents loss in this case, they chose to publicise their mourning for the whole world to see on facebook. They could have easily controlled who joined the commemorative group with the relevant settings and have limited postings to the deceased's family and friends.

To put someone in prison for 18 months for this is not the correct punishment - it achieves nothing.

Let's pose a further question - if someone posted on a facebook group commemorating for example the Hillsborough disaster - and blamed the fans in the way that Murdoch's paper did - would that be deemed a similar offence punishable by imprisonment? After all it would cause the same amount of offence and distress to relatives of those who died and has been caused in this case.

And should now Nathan Eccleston be jailed for causing upset and distress to the 9/11 relatives by stating their own government killed them for nefarious purposes?

Once you start down this road, we are on a slippery slope. Will any anti-war postings on facebook be deemed as causing distress to relatives of dead servicemen? See how easily the slope becomes a cliff?

As I said at the beginning, I in no way condone what the person did. They obviously have no life of their own and get fun from strange things like this.

But a criminal offence?

Yes markjw that's what I was getting at in a very rambling way! Totally agree!

Having freedom of speech does not mean it is OK to abuse it.
Deliberately violating someone's commemorative FB page and calling the dead girl a "sl*t" on there is clearly over the top. I really think it would have made their FB page fail to fulfil its intended function if it was limited for access to just friends/family etc - when people have a very wide circle such as being at school.

We are not talking about curtailing freedom of speech, not "thought police" here (albeit that does appear to be happening elsewhere!) - we are talking about someone who quite deliberately and cruelly stomped all over other people's grief - and that is clearly inexcusable.

Let's remember it was the British Legal system (ewhich has been working "fairly well" for some number of years!) that found him guilty - he can appeal, if he or anyone really thinks he has grounds to do so!

The legal system has to be what sets the bounds in these kinds of cases and I presonally think it has done the right thing in this case... YMMV, of course!!

Lol, he got counter-trolled irl.

Sounds like he's a bit of a noob, who does their trolling without a vpn these days?