[MTVN]

Jesus, this is draconian, 4 years in jail for a facebook post about riots that never even happened!?

[Livia]

I'm sure the prosecutors had several precidents they could call on for a long sentence. Incitement has always carried a longer sentence than the act itself.

MTVN... 4-0! Wahhhhhhhhhhh!

[Scarlett.]

Funny how you can run someone over and kill them, then escape with a one year sentence, yet for creating one Facebook page you can get four years

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Chewy

Funny how you can run someone over and kill them, then escape with a one year sentence, yet for creating one Facebook page you can get four years

It's all about intent. No one who organises a riot on facebook can say they got caught up in the moment. Their intended involvement is premeditated and they're inciting others to take part.

[Zippy]

Can you please stop with the ignorant crap about creating a Facebook page. Thats not what they got jailed for.

If Osama bin Laden created a Facebook page inciting mass suicide bombings would you say his crime was just creating a Facebook page? No!

If those two braindead chavrats had their way their town would have been smashed to a pulp. And it was no joke either. Ringleaders deserve tougher sentences to deter other ringleaders because thats where it starts.

Understand?

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Zippy

Can you please stop with the ignorant crap about creating a Facebook page. Thats not what they got jailed for.

If Osama bin Laden created a Facebook page inciting mass suicide bombings would you say his crime was just creating a Facebook page? No!

If those two braindead chavrats had their way their town would have been smashed to a pulp. And it was no joke either. Ringleaders deserve tougher sentences to deter other ringleaders because thats where it starts.

Understand?

Yes, I understand and agree with your post 100%

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Shaun

It's absurd. Obviously they're being made examples of to send some kind of message to other rioters, but what exactly is that message? "Don't ever criticise the government's decisions and state of affairs again otherwise we'll jail you"? I mean even ignoring the entirely facetious nature of this supposed 'crime' (by which I think telling someone to do something is not directly correlatory with the crime itself, especially if it's done online: everyone who participated will have done so of their own accord, not because of these two supposed criminal masterminds), this is just going to play into rioters' hands even more because all of a sudden we've got a ridiculous, out-of-touch and unfair judiciary system to match that lovely old police force.

Well done society.

They are accomplices,IMO they should be getting about 12 years.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by jedward fever

They are accomplices,IMO they should be getting about 12 years.

Murderers dont even get that long half the time

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Murderers dont even get that long half the time

Most people know my opinion on killers,I would bring the death penalty in on them scumbags.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by jedward fever

Most people know my opinion on killers,I would bring the death penalty in on them scumbags.

Fair enough

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Zippy

Can you please stop with the ignorant crap about creating a Facebook page. Thats not what they got jailed for.

If Osama bin Laden created a Facebook page inciting mass suicide bombings would you say his crime was just creating a Facebook page? No!

If those two braindead chavrats had their way their town would have been smashed to a pulp. And it was no joke either. Ringleaders deserve tougher sentences to deter other ringleaders because thats where it starts.

Understand?

I think that is what he's been jailed for though. No matter how you word it - "inciting disorder", "encouraging violence" etc. etc. - you can't deny the fact that he has done nothing more than make a post on a website. I mean, lets not give this guy too much credit, do we really think he's that inspirational a figure that by inviting people to a facebook event he's going to get all these people out on the streets rioting that would otherwise have sat at home?

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I think that is what he's been jailed for though. No matter how you word it - "inciting disorder", "encouraging violence" etc. etc. - you can't deny the fact that he has done nothing more than make a post on a website. I mean, lets not give this guy too much credit, do we really think he's that inspirational a figure that by inviting people to a facebook event he's going to get all these people out on the streets rioting that would otherwise have sat at home?

No it certainly is not! Facebook was just the choice of communications medium. It was the incitement and intent that nailed them.

It astonishes me that people can trivialise their actions when we all know damn well that the flash mobs that destroyed businesses, homes, areas and thousnads of lives were actually brought out in force via social network sites. And there in lies the very point of hitting them hard. Such instant mass messaging can bring a mob together much quicker than the police can gather. Its absolutely crucial to come down heavy on this behaviour and ensure nobody tries to trigger such anarchy ever again. If you cant see that then I give up.

And save your sympathy for the more deserving; like the ones who lost their lives last week. Or the hundreds who lost homes and businesses. Not two useless nasty minded scumbags who were intent on burning a town to the ground.

The more I think about the more Im convinced that 2 years in prison was actually very lenient. And I have no time whatsoever for liberal namby pamby do-gooders who laughably seem to think that being soft on all those mindless thugs who took over our streets last week will prevent them doing it again. Like fcking hell! But hard hitting punishment may certainly make them think twice. And thats really all that matters.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Zippy

No it certainly is not! Facebook was just the choice of communications medium. It was the incitement and intent that nailed them.

It astonishes me that people can trivialise their actions when we all know damn well that the flash mobs that destroyed businesses, homes, areas and thousnads of lives were actually brought out in force via social network sites. And there in lies the very point of hitting them hard. Such instant mass messaging can bring a mob together much quicker than the police can gather. Its absolutely crucial to come down heavy on this behaviour and ensure nobody tries to trigger such anarchy ever again. If you cant see that then I give up.

And save your sympathy for the more deserving; like the ones who lost their lives last week. Or the hundreds who lost homes and businesses. Not two useless nasty minded scumbags who were intent on burning a town to the ground.

The more I think about the more Im convinced that 2 years in prison was actually very lenient. And I have no time whatsoever for liberal namby pamby do-gooders who laughably seem to think that being soft on all those mindless thugs who took over our streets last week will prevent them doing it again. Like fcking hell! But hard hitting punishment may certainly make them think twice. And thats really all that matters.

You're completely sensationalising, it's not even like these guys instigated any rioting, nothing even happened in the town as a result of this! So what exactly are they guilty of, failing to start a riot? And that gets a more severe sentence then all of those who actually did riot. It honestly scares me that 2 people can be locked behind bars for 4 years because they did something stupid on a social networking site which didn't even lead to anything. There is just no way that this is a fair and proportionate sentence, no way.

Your second and third paragraphs show the problem here, people are being guided completely by their anger at what has happened as a result of the riots. And then you seem to think there's some moral equivalency between burning a home, or a business, even killing someone, and then making a riot event on Facebook. It's ridiculous. You tell me to save my sympathy for those more deserving, well why don't you save your anger for those more deserving; those who are actually responsible for a man's death, or for a home-owners loss.

The response to this by the courts has just been absurd. A guy who stole a bottle of water got 6 months, a guy who stole 2 t-shirts was released. The punishments that are being dished out are just all over the place and don't seem to reflect appropriate sentencing. And give it a rest with the "liberal namby pamdy" rubbish.

[GypsyGoth]

I think these guys got what they deserved. I'm glad they got such sentences.

Next time there is a riot, others will think twice about taking advantage of the chaos.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by GypsyGoth

Next time there is a riot, others will think twice about taking advantage of the chaos.

Well...not really. Given that half the people who actually DID riot are getting away with nothing, or week long sentences...

[Zippy]

MTVN

funny how you always seem to instinctively side with the criminal I've noticed.

And you can downplay what they did all you like but their attempts at bringing destruction to their town are clear to see. Clearly the court of law agrees. As do the vast majority of the general public from what Ive read and heard.

The fact that it didnt actually happen was not from lack of them trying. It was because thankfully there were not enough sick twats like them in their town. And the fact they didnt get to actually riot was probably very upsetting for them. Its pretty obvious that theyre exactly the type that would have been out there causing maximum destruction...just for the hell of it. But they were too cowardly to do it by themselves and wanted a mob with them.

But yeah, keep kidding yourself that the fact they didnt get their wishes somehow makes them innocent. Personally Im very happy theyre getting punished for a huge FAIL. A fail that spared hundreds of people great pain and devastation.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Zippy

MTVN

funny how you always seem to instinctively side with the criminal I've noticed.

And you can downplay what they did all you like but their attempts at bringing destruction to their town are clear to see. Clearly the court of law agrees. As do the vast majority of the general public from what Ive read and heard.

The fact that it didnt actually happen was not from lack of them trying. It was because thankfully there were not enough sick twats like them in their town. And the fact they didnt get to actually riot was probably very upsetting for them. Its pretty obvious that theyre exactly the type that would have been out there causing maximum destruction...just for the hell of it. But they were too cowardly to do it by themselves and wanted a mob with them.

But yeah, keep kidding yourself that the fact they didnt get their wishes somehow makes them innocent. Personally Im very happy theyre getting punished for a huge FAIL. A fail that spared hundreds of people great pain and devastation.

As oppose to who in this case? Who is the victim of this guys "crime" exactly? There isn't one. I don't always side with the criminal at all but I try to avoid the relentless bloodlust and condemnation that is often displayed, there is always a context to crime

[arista]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Well...not really. Given that half the people who actually DID riot are getting away with nothing, or week long sentences...

Its a example
to worn the future Criminals
that Police can track you.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by MTVN

As oppose to who in this case? Who is the victim of this guys "crime" exactly? There isn't one. I don't always side with the criminal at all but I try to avoid the relentless bloodlust and condemnation that is often displayed, there is always a context to crime

We don't know the full extent of the crime. Maybe the riot they were trying to whip up didn't take place only because the police were aware and nipped it in the bud. That doesn't make these two people innocent. They're lucky that a riot didn't actually take place or their sentences could have been a lot longer.

All we really know about these two people is that they were convicted of incitement. We don't know what was said, we don't know whether the Facebook thing was the only charge, we don't know any of the mitigating circumstances nor do we know whether these two had any previous. Incitement has always carried a higher sentence than the actual deed.

There are hardly any controls on the Internet and people have felt free and safe to say pretty much they want... only now, people will have have a bit of a think whether it's worth four years of their life or not.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Livia

We don't know the full extent of the crime. Maybe the riot they were trying to whip up didn't take place only because the police were aware and nipped it in the bud. That doesn't make these two people innocent. They're lucky that a riot didn't actually take place or their sentences could have been a lot longer.

All we really know about these two people is that they were convicted of incitement. We don't know what was said, we don't know whether the Facebook thing was the only charge, we don't know any of the mitigating circumstances nor do we know whether these two had any previous. Incitement has always carried a higher sentence than the actual deed.

There are hardly any controls on the Internet and people have felt free and safe to say pretty much they want... only now, people will have have a bit of a think whether it's worth four years of their life or not.

From what I've read the guy created a facebook event to riot in Northwich and then the only ones who actually turned up were the police. Let's not lose any sense of perspective here, these riots in Northwich did not exist outside of the world of Facebook, I fail to see how failing to start a riot deserves a 4 year jail sentence.

This is what the Chinese state media website Global times had to say: "The US and Britain used to criticise developing countries for curbing freedom of speech...Britain's new attitude will help appease the quarrels between East and West over the future management of the internet". I consider it a pretty bad sign when we have the backing of a notorious human rights abuser who's oppressive actions we regularly condemn

The same sentence that these two guys were given was also given to Tesfaye Bramble (Titus' Bramble's brother) who raped a 19 year old. The same for Rajinder Dutt who got 4 years for supplying £1.3million worth of heroin. Is creating a facebook page - or to use the official terminology "inciting disorder" - really on the same level as rape and drug dealing. People have killed and gotten less!

If you ask me this sentence represents a complete violation of free speech and it sets a very dangerous precedent if it is now possible to serve years in a prison cell because of an ill judged post on a social networking site.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Livia

We don't know the full extent of the crime. Maybe the riot they were trying to whip up didn't take place only because the police were aware and nipped it in the bud. That doesn't make these two people innocent. They're lucky that a riot didn't actually take place or their sentences could have been a lot longer.

All we really know about these two people is that they were convicted of incitement. We don't know what was said, we don't know whether the Facebook thing was the only charge, we don't know any of the mitigating circumstances nor do we know whether these two had any previous. Incitement has always carried a higher sentence than the actual deed.

There are hardly any controls on the Internet and people have felt free and safe to say pretty much they want... only now, people will have have a bit of a think whether it's worth four years of their life or not.

From what I've read the guy created a facebook event to riot in Northwich and then the only ones who actually turned up were the police. Let's not lose any sense of perspective here, these riots in Northwich did not exist outside of the world of Facebook, I fail to see how failing to start a riot deserves a 4 year jail sentence.

This is what the Chinese state media website Global times had to say: "The US and Britain used to criticise developing countries for curbing freedom of speech...Britain's new attitude will help appease the quarrels between East and West over the future management of the internet". I consider it a pretty bad sign when we have the backing of a notorious human rights abuser who's oppressive actions we regularly condemn

The same sentence that these two guys were given was also given to Tesfaye Bramble (Titus' Bramble's brother) who raped a 19 year old. The same for Rajinder Dutt who got 4 years for supplying £1.3million worth of heroin. Is creating a facebook page - or to use the official terminology "inciting disorder" - really on the same level as rape and drug dealing. People have killed and gotten less!

If you ask me this sentence represents a complete violation of free speech and it sets a very dangerous precedent if it is now possible to serve years in a prison cell because of an ill judged post on a social networking site.

[Scarlett.]

So do you guys agree with this then?

A man has been arrested in the U.K. for allegedly trying to arrange a city-wide water gun fight using his BlackBerry.

A 20-year-old man from Colchester, Essex was charged under the Serious Crime Act of 2007 for the alleged call to super soakers arms, the Essex Police reported on their website.

The unidentified accused was held with another 20-year-old man, Essex police told the Toronto Star. The second man was released without charge.

Many took to Twitter thinking the statement was a joke.

“I’m thinking of having a water fight with the kids but i (sic) don’t own a blackberry.will (sic) I be OK??” one Twitter user posted on the police force’s Twitter feed.

“My neighbour has just bought a Mini. I am certain they are planning a daring gold heist,” another Twitter user added.

But the Essex police force assured social media users that the arrest was no laughing matter, tweeting “Re water fight comments — police believe there may be more involved in light of recent disorder.”

“Obviously we are alert in general to the fact that people may try to cover there tracks by describing one planned activity as something slightly different,” Chris Lane, press office manager with the Essex Police, told the Star.

While public water fights have gone off peacefully in the U.K., a 2008 water-slinging event arranged over Facebook led to three children being sent to hospital with suspected concussions and broken bones after knives were pulled in London. Two hundred and fifty people had gathered in Hyde Park an attempt to cool down with water guns and bottles.

Police would not release information on the number of people the accused had allegedly contacted through his BlackBerry to arrange the water fight.

The man has been given conditional bail and is due to appear in court on September 1. If found guilty he could face “significant penalties under the Serious Crime Act,” Lane told the Star.

BlackBerry’s secure and virtually untraceable messaging system was the tool of choice for looters coordinating their actions during the recent London riots, with one British MP calling on the phone’s instant-messaging service to be suspended until the violence subsided.

British Prime Minister David Cameron announced in the House of Commons last Thursday that his government was “working with the Police, the intelligence services and industry to look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality.”

Britain has some of the strongest laws in the world warranting the interception of phone, email or online messages by police. Forces can access messages in the broadly-worded name of “detecting crime or preventing disorder.”

Essex police would not comment if they had increased their surveillance of BlackBerry messages since the riots.

The alleged water fight isn’t the only matter keeping the force busy.

“Police searching for owner of yellow and blue budgie found flying around Co-op in Westcliff on Friday. Is he yours?” the force tweeted before announcing the 20-year-old’s arrest.

?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by MTVN

From what I've read the guy created a facebook event to riot in Northwich and then the only ones who actually turned up were the police. Let's not lose any sense of perspective here, these riots in Northwich did not exist outside of the world of Facebook, I fail to see how failing to start a riot deserves a 4 year jail sentence.

This is what the Chinese state media website Global times had to say: "The US and Britain used to criticise developing countries for curbing freedom of speech...Britain's new attitude will help appease the quarrels between East and West over the future management of the internet". I consider it a pretty bad sign when we have the backing of a notorious human rights abuser who's oppressive actions we regularly condemn

The same sentence that these two guys were given was also given to Tesfaye Bramble (Titus' Bramble's brother) who raped a 19 year old. The same for Rajinder Dutt who got 4 years for supplying £1.3million worth of heroin. Is creating a facebook page - or to use the official terminology "inciting disorder" - really on the same level as rape and drug dealing. People have killed and gotten less!

If you ask me this sentence represents a complete violation of free speech and it sets a very dangerous precedent if it is now possible to serve years in a prison cell because of an ill judged post on a social networking site.

Freedom of speech is something quite different to incement to riot. You're making it sound like these poor lads have been set up! And we don't know it was one ill-judged post on a social networking site. I'd be very - very - surprised if that's all there was to it. If that was true, the defence would have been all over the prosecution.

But hey - I'm not arguing with you any more today. I'm too chuffed for you at your A level results so I'm shutting my pie hole.

:-)

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Livia

Freedom of speech is something quite different to incement to riot. You're making it sound like these poor lads have been set up! And we don't know it was one ill-judged post on a social networking site. I'd be very - very - surprised if that's all there was to it. If that was true, the defence would have been all over the prosecution.

But hey - I'm not arguing with you any more today. I'm too chuffed for you at your A level results so I'm shutting my pie hole.

:-)

Fair enough, I'm happy to agree to disagree

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Chewy

So do you guys agree with this then?


?

For all we know the Toronto Star made up the entire thing. Trivialising what went on during the riots makes it easier for people to do it again.