[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-16144640

Two teenagers who used Facebook to try to start a riot in a Scottish city have been locked up for three years each.

Shawn Divin, 16, and Jordan McGinley, 18, were administrators of a Facebook page called "Riot in the toon" which urged people to "kill some daftys".

The Dundee riot page was published during the summer's unrest in England.

Divin, who was described as an inmate at Polmont youth offenders institute, and McGinley, from Dundee, had earlier pleaded guilty to breaching the peace.

Sheriff Elizabeth Munro sentenced Divin to a total of four years and three months, which included one year for breaching a previous probation order and three months for breaching his bail by inciting riots.

Dundee Sheriff Court heard that the Facebook page encouraged others to smash up buildings, loot shops and attack police officers at the time of the riots which swept several English cities in August.

The sentence seems harsh considering that they'd pleaded guilty to a crime in which no damage was done - what if the "riot" had taken place - would they have got life sentences ?

[Ramsay]

I remember some other guys getting the same sentance a few months ago for the same reason
Bit over the top yeah they should just get fined or something

[Scarlett.]

They'll be out in a year, since they already will have served sometime and will probably be out on good behavior.

[Niamh.]

I suppose they need to come down hard on things like this, It so easy for people to organize **** like this on facebook so they need to be discouraged from doing it by harsh sentencing.

[Jack_]

I'm glad they're doing this, if only they implemented such a 'no tolerance' kind of scheme across the board of crimes then things may start to move forward in the right direction with regards to crime levels.

[Pyramid*]

Good enough for them and glad it wasn't some pathetic community service and a rap on the knuckles.

Quite a few other Judges could take a leaf out of this sentencing Judge's book.

If anyone thinks it's too harsh: go have a look at the Manchester riots, those hurt and the millions of pounds worth of damaged caused - not just to buildings, but for some: their livliehoods were destroyed.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Snowball

Good enough for them and glad it wasn't some pathetic community service and a rap on the knuckles.

Quite a few other Judges could take a leaf out of this sentencing Judge's book.

If anyone thinks it's too harsh: go have a look at the Manchester riots, those hurt and the millions of pounds worth of damaged caused - not just to buildings, but for some: their livliehoods were destroyed.

That's such a bad basis for a justice system. It's like giving someone 10 years just for speeding because somebody else who was speeding crashed their car and killed somebody

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by MTVN

That's such a bad basis for a justice system. It's like giving someone 10 years just for speeding because somebody else who was speeding crashed their car and killed somebody

Not saying things should ever go that far, but you know if that ever were to happen at least we might be living in a far safer world than we are now. People might actually learn to stop speeding then instead of us all being guilty of doing it, just trying to avoid being caught for it.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

That's such a bad basis for a justice system. It's like giving someone 10 years just for speeding because somebody else who was speeding crashed their car and killed somebody

No it's not at all. The intent here was to actually start a riot. A person speeding doesn't go out with the intent to kill someone.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Christmas Neeve

No it's not at all. The intent here was to actually start a riot. A person speeding doesn't go out with the intent to kill someone.

But you still going out knowing the potential consequences of speeding and that it's going to be dangerous.. I see your point but I still don't think it's right to give someone a sentence like this on the basis of what could have happened, at the end of the day they were two idiots just being stupid on Facebook, they say it was only as a joke and considering there was stuff like "let's show the English how it's done" it wouldn't surprise me if it was. Nothing even happened as a result of this, and 3 years? That's the kind of sentence that drug dealers get, that rapists sometimes get, it's the kind of sentence that is given for assault or a knife attack, crimes that do actually have serious consequences

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by MTVN

That's such a bad basis for a justice system. It's like giving someone 10 years just for speeding because somebody else who was speeding crashed their car and killed somebody

It is nothing of the sort, and I suspect you know that all too well.

It's spot on, given that it was when the riots were spreading and starting up in other parts of the UK.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Snowball

If anyone thinks it's too harsh: go have a look at the Manchester riots, those hurt and the millions of pounds worth of damaged caused - not just to buildings, but for some: their livliehoods were destroyed.

But the Dundee two caused NO DAMAGE .....

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Omah

But the Dundee two caused NO DAMAGE .....

I'll let you read my further comment a few posts back for further details.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Omah

But the Dundee two caused NO DAMAGE .....

And? If someone came up to me in the street and threatened to stab my heart out I'd want them imprisoned for my own personal safety, the same thing applies here except instead of protecting an individual, the idea is to protect an entire area. Why leave things under the pretense that 'oh, it hasn't happened yet so we won't bother', for it then to possibly happen and for it to be too late? Why not prevent those chances of anything happening early?

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Jack_

And? If someone came up to me in the street and threatened to stab my heart out I'd want them imprisoned for my own personal safety, the same thing applies here except instead of protecting an individual, the idea is to protect an entire area. Why leave things under the pretense that 'oh, it hasn't happened yet so we won't bother', for it then to possibly happen and for it to be too late? Why not prevent those chances of anything happening early?

But would you expect them to get the same sentence as someone who did actually stab you in the heart?

The lines are being blurred here between potential crimes, and actual crimes, they're not the same thing, you can't create some kind of equivalency between creating a facebook page for a riot and actually causing one, actually causing serious damage, actually causing arson, actually causing theft etc. etc.

[MTVN]

It's ridiculous, and quite scary really that you can be locked up for years for creating a Facebook page. They did the same to a couple of guys who also made a Facebook event for a riot which never even took place, and that nobody showed up to, I'm not sure if anything actually happened here? Either way it's quite draconian IMO, and judges often hand out a lot more lenient sentences than they did here and for much worse crimes than making an event page on Facebook

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by MTVN

It's ridiculous, and quite scary really that you can be locked up for years for creating a Facebook page. They did the same to a couple of guys who also made a Facebook event for a riot which never even took place, and that nobody showed up to, I'm not sure if anything actually happened here? Either way it's quite draconian IMO, and judges often hand out a lot more lenient sentences than they did here and for much worse crimes than making an event page on Facebook

They didn't get locked up for creating a Facebook page or making an event.

They got locked up for creating a facebook page which was designed only for one purpose: to trying to incite riots, to smash up buildings, loot shops and attack police officers . Not quite as innocent sounding when you put it into context.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Snowball

They didn't get locked up for creating a Facebook page or making an event.

They got locked up for creating a facebook page which was designed only for one purpose: to trying to incite riots, to smash up buildings, loot shops and attack police officers . Not quite as innocent sounding when you put it into context.

Yes Great Point

[arista]

Originally Posted by Omah

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-16144640



The sentence seems harsh considering that they'd pleaded guilty to a crime in which no damage was done - what if the "riot" had taken place - would they have got life sentences ?

Harsh?

Its about setting a Example like we did

[InOne]

Take them out to the moors and shoot them.

[Mystic Mock]

Good as we didnt want a sequel to the riots.

[Mystic Mock]

So MTVN and Omah,would you wait until its to late like the last time the riots happened? I agree with the new approach and that is stopping them before they get to powerful.

I also will add that if it was Al Qaeda that had threatened to cause trouble somewhere in this country you would not be saying that was harsh that they got sentenced even though they didnt do it.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Bethlehem

So MTVN and Omah,would you wait until its to late like the last time the riots happened? I agree with the new approach and that is stopping them before they get to powerful.

I also will add that if it was Al Qaeda that had threatened to cause trouble somewhere in this country you would not be saying that was harsh that they got sentenced even though they didnt do it.

Since when was it a choice between letting riots go ahead or giving them 3 years in jail? No I would have them given what I consider to be a fairer punishment

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Bethlehem

So MTVN and Omah,would you wait until its to late like the last time the riots happened? I agree with the new approach and that is stopping them before they get to powerful.

I also will add that if it was Al Qaeda that had threatened to cause trouble somewhere in this country you would not be saying that was harsh that they got sentenced even though they didnt do it.

Let's use another example.

Say riots would have taken place on the back of these idiots trying to get it all kicking off up in Scotland........ I bet my house that both Omah and MTVN would be the first ones to say, "They knew they were going to do it, the Police should have acted, they had the info there, rather than let it happen".

If that would had happened, no doubt both of you would have found fault with that also.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Snowball

Let's use another example.

Say riots would have taken place on the back of these idiots trying to get it all kicking off up in Scotland........ I bet my house that both Omah and MTVN would be the first ones to say, "They knew they were going to do it, the Police should have acted, they had the info there, rather than let it happen".

If that would had happened, no doubt both of you would have found fault with that also.

This is stupid, whatever the sentence was the police arrested them and nothing happened, the fact that no riots took place in Dundee is completely irrelevant to the severity of their sentence which was only given today