Kent youth PCC Paris Brown investigated over tweets
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-22070354

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2Pv1GA3Ve

That should have been a warning to Twitter abusers, including Ms Brown, aged 15 - what you say can be held against you, now or in the future..... :pipe:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...tter-rant.html

She has given her Job up now


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...91_634x585.jpg

Yes , she is going to cash in on her new found Celebrity status , going to do the rounds on the talk shows, game shows and rumour has it she is booked to appear on Big Brother...!!!

More proof that if you don't want your private thoughts to come back and bite you on the arse, don't post them up in a public arena. How could someone this stupid have been elevated to that particular post anyway?

Is Twitter in the public arena ? I thought it was a private messaging system between tweeters and followers ??

sorry, I didn't know it's okay to be a hateful bigot as long as you're under 18. And she's not just a 17 y/o, she's receiving a PAYCHECK from the TAXPAYERS. and many of those tax payers are the minorities that she is hateful against.

That depends whether your set your privacy profiles or not. I guess she didn't.

Its all a bit of a grey area........!!!!

For the love of ****ing God, for the last time, her keeping/losing the job is the secondary issue here. My problem is with this paper thinking it is acceptable to plaster one of her Twitter photos on the front page of a national newspaper in a blatant attempt to mock her and make everyone go 'hahahaha look at the ugly bitch taking a photo in the mirror!', that is disgusting. What was wrong with a photo of her taken by the press that's being used everywhere else?

Yeah I'm not condoning the tweets but I do feel they may also have been taken out of context slightly. Using the term '********t', whilst not exactly acceptable, isn't always used as a direct gay slur...it can and is also used as a general insult. No, that doesn't make it right but there is the possibility here that the word was used in a general context and this paper have tried to make out she was being homophobic. There's nothing right about younger generations using these kind of words as insults but that isn't the fault of this girl - it's similar to people using 'gay' to describe something as bad...a lot of gay people use the same term, it's not right but does that make them homophobic?

I'm not going to say it again. My problem is that a national newspaper is trying to publicly humiliate and vilify a 17 year old girl until she breaks down. That cannot be justified. In fact what's happening here could have very damaging consequences to this girl. This is the same paper that inadvertently led a transgender woman to take her own life, and I don't think this paper will be satisfied until the same thing happens to this girl. Maybe then it'll have some ****ing decorum.

I had heard that whilst applying for positions social media were now checked to ascertain the suitability of applicants?
This was not the case here it seems, unless this poor young woman was set up for a fall?

poor young woman? give me a break. she was bragging about how she can't believe she's being paid for this, and she was right, how ****ing stupid are the people of Kent to be paying that repulsive bigot a paycheck. She's not just a repulsive bigot, she made a fool of every tax paying citizen of Kent.

Not every employer checks these things but as we discussed in that last thread about social media, if its in the public domain it can come back and bite you as it is free for all to see.

Owen Jones
‏@OwenJones84
Kudos to the Daily Mail! Drove a 17-year-old girl from her job and possibly ruined her future for behaving like a teenager! You showed her!

https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/stat...33623075848192

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

A spot on hero as always.

Paris Brown: Kent youth PCC resigns after Twitter row
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22083032

A harsh lesson for the young lady, but she appears to have learnt from it - let's hope others do ..... :pipe:

Any position within the police has these checks as a rule... Are we to believe they were not checked, or just that we are bowing to media pressure?
The Mail are on a roll recently aren't they with the sway they have over the masses?

wait, behaving like a teenager, sems suspiciously like acting like a neo-nazi accoridng to Jack. so are all teenagers hateful racist gay-bashing bigots??? is that what you are saying Jack?

According to this, it had not been checked.....I have no idea how reliable this is but just bringing it to the discussion:

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/times_gu...n_twitter.aspx

Neo-nazi :joker: :joker: :joker: :joker: :joker:

Christ al-****ing-mighty. Are you Paul Dacre?

No, not every teenager uses gay slurs as general insults but a fair few do and I should point out a lot of those tweets were posted when she was 14/15. Walk around a high school playground and you'll hear the same words being used in general contexts. That doesn't make it right but for Christ sake it doesn't make her or them a neo-nazi. It's a generational problem...most people grow up and grow out of it. Unless you're suggesting every person that is overhead saying 'that's so gay' or other gay-associated words being used as general insults should be arrested? I don't know about anyone else but I don't think that'd work.

Using those words isn't right but with no context people can't go throwing about accusations of being a neo-nazi or 'gay-bashers'. I mean ffs...

No reason to vilify her, though she should of course be fired.

She wasn't working on a checkout you know. She had a responsibility, but it turns out she's an idiotic bigot.

Maybe if she was just behaving like a teenager, it's evidence that teenagers are too young and too inexperienced to be given any kind of responsibility. Or maybe it's just her.

Yeah, and I really don't know how many times I have to say this now, because I thought I made it clear when I entered the thread the first time...my problem is with the Daily Mail attempting to humiliate a 17 year old girl. Whether she keeps the job or not is secondary to that issue IMO. People seem to be accepting this story at face value and not looking at other issues here...I don't see what is acceptable about a national newspaper publicly mocking a teenage girl? It's essentially bullying and for her to be treated like that, it could have very damaging psychological consequences and that isn't justifiable.

This issue could've been sorted with a lot less vilification from this paper, they're just using it to push their agenda and target another individual. That's sick.

I could go on about specific tweets but I'm too ill to do so now so I'll leave it until I feel better.

Jack she was the Fool that put it out there
Once you Tweet its forever tracked.
So You are Wrong
Public Tweets - Full Rights to publish them.

Absolute nonsense.

It is not acceptable to invade a 17-year-old's privacy and publish tweets and pictures of her without permission. It's essentially bullying and whilst what she said was wrong, what full rights to the Daily Mail have to post them all across the nation? I believe she was between 14 and 16 when she made those posts anyway, and I think it's reasonable that she wouldn't go rummaging through her her status history, some of which started three years ago.

I'd go on all day but Jack's done a fine job of expanding on what I was going to say. I refer you to the rest of them.

No They are Public Domain - not private.