uk: Saying 'you let down your father; is now a crime?

[DVTimes]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19059127

how on earth is this a crime?

[oppoten]

Much trolling in the UK is race related, so they want to crack down on trolling as a whole.

[Vapid - BANNED FOR LIFE]

The thought police, more pronounced than Belarus.

[RubyGoodnight]

The Rileyy kid also sent death threats. I think that's when the police stepped in.

[papill0n]

it shouldn't be and you definitely did

[DVTimes]

its a 17 year old child

[TheDA]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19059127

how on earth is this a crime?

It was probably because of the death threats you clueless twat.

its a 17 year old child

A 17 year old child making death threats.

[LouiseLloyd]

Awww how cute...

@rileyy_69 is gorgeous and the sweetest boy ever, two in one!! You should follow him because I say so, love @ellieldavies x x ...

Oh and he loves pornhub!

[DVTimes]

It was probably because of the death threats you clueless twat.



A 17 year old child making death threats.

where on the bbc news story does it say that?

[foulfowl]

I saw nothing about death threats in that article.

[Phoenix]

being an asshat is the main thing i think...the kid needs a slap upside the head

[DVTimes]

I saw nothing about death threats in that article.

the reason given is that the coment was unplesent.

also i belive that if it was due to a death threat that under uk law he would have been charged with a different crime.

ie, if i said i am going to beat you up, that (i belive) is classed as assault (just saying the threat is itesf an assalt).

i suspect he will not be charged.

the question is who brought the poloce in, or did they do it themselves. for instance police have to investgate any complaints, but unless somone complains then they tend not to get involved.

for instance i can walk around england (scotish law i think may differ a bit) nude. but its not a crime unless somone tells the police they are upset by me walking around nude.

often you find the police arest people but do not charge.

[DVTimes]

suspicion of malicious communications? WTF does that mean? They arrest you and you go to court to have judge determine if your speech was illegal? Damn, you Brits really are subjects.

they are oldish laws.

law 1 applies to an old law that was introduced to stop people insulting phone operators years ago when you had to phone an operator to be put through to somone. they (police) are now applying this to twitter/facebook. thus if you insult somone its a crime. i belive thats what they have arrested him on.

law 2 is the act that stops people transmitting offence of some kind (i forget what). it was for tv and radio stations to stop them transmitting certain stuff. but they now use this on the net.

if it had been a death threat then he would have been arrested under somthing else.

but as i say i suspect the cps will not bring charges.

[DVTimes]

being an asshat is the main thing i think...the kid needs a slap upside the head

i am not sure what he said was even that bad.

he simply said you let your dad down. well he may not have meant that in a bad way. he even said he was just gutted for him he did not win.

its only like say me entering a painting competition becase a relative was a painter. and i did not win. and somone said sorry you did not win as it would have meant somthing to a relative.

in otherwords i am not sure he meant anything bad by what he posted, but simply worded it badly.

i think we all have posted somthing that other read differently. i know i have often.

[TheDA]

"I'm going to find you and I'm going to drown you" and "I'm going to kill you" were phrases that were used.

[alias]

Should be a crime to post shitty UK news on international forums.

[DVTimes]

No way, I can't believe in the UK if you insult someone they'll arrest you? Matter of fact, no fucking way........

Labour (i belive) in the last few years made a law that says that just offending somone is an offence.

in otherwords if your in the uk, and somthing i do offends you, its a crime.

they hand out criminal records like convety these days.

last year i did 30 mph in a 30 mph zone. but the speed camera clocked me at 33. i had a gps on so i know i was doing 33.

i tried to complain but they said that if i did not take the fine i had to go to court 70 miles away (where i was court) at 9am. so that meant getting up at 5am to drive to a court room that i did not know where it was. plus the cost of travel was more than the fine. so of course you end up paying the fine.

[DVTimes]

"I'm going to find you and I'm going to drown you" and "I'm going to kill you" were phrases that were used.

where?

its not in the bbc link.

and he was NOT charged with a threat to kill.

[TheDA]

where?

its not in the bbc link.

and he was NOT charged with a threat to kill.

Twitter. Do you know what malicious actually means?

[DVTimes]

Twitter. Do you know what malicious actually means?

the threat to kill/murder/harm is a crime.

thus if that was the reason he would have been charged with that.

he was chasrged with suspicion of malicious communications. thus he was arrested for saying about his dad.

check the act out.

the act is/was set up (as i have stated) to stop people ipsetting staff at the phone exchange. thus if you phoned up and said your a fool, thats an offence.

you do not arest someone on a diffence act. if i shot you they would not arest me on a speeding fine.

[DVTimes]

Twitter. Do you know what malicious actually means?

he would (if your saying is correct) be charged under:

The Offences against the Person Act 1861

Section 16

The making of a threat to kill is an offence where the defendant intends the victim to fear it will be carried out. It is immaterial whether it is premeditated or said in anger.

Although the normal maximum sentence is ten years, offenders deemed to present a "significant risk" of "serious harm" to the public can now receive a life sentence under the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

Other threats of violence may be prosecuted summarily under section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986.

This section, as originally enacted, replaced the offence of sending, delivering or uttering a letter or writing threatening to kill or murder under section 1 of the 10 & 11 Vict c 66 (1847); the other offences under that section being consolidated elsewhere.

[TheDA]

the threat to kill/murder/harm is a crime.

thus if that was the reason he would have been charged with that.

he was chasrged with suspicion of malicious communications. thus he was arrested for saying about his dad.

check the act out.

the act is/was set up (as i have stated) to stop people ipsetting staff at the phone exchange. thus if you phoned up and said your a fool, thats an offence.

you do not arest someone on a diffence act. if i shot you they would not arest me on a speeding fine.

As far as I have read he has only been arrested, he has not yet been charged with anything.

He was arrested on 'suspicion of malicious communications', that covers any malicious communication.

They will investigate and question him, depending on what they find they could then decide to actually charge him with death threats.

He will probably get off with something less serious if not completely.

[RubyGoodnight]

i am not sure what he said was even that bad.

he simply said you let your dad down. well he may not have meant that in a bad way. he even said he was just gutted for him he did not win.

its only like say me entering a painting competition becase a relative was a painter. and i did not win. and somone said sorry you did not win as it would have meant somthing to a relative.

in otherwords i am not sure he meant anything bad by what he posted, but simply worded it badly.

i think we all have posted somthing that other read differently. i know i have often.

I can understand thinking that with the fact the BBC article only mentions the 'dad tweet'. If you go back into his timeline, though, it's pretty obvious that me meant to be a prick. Then the death threats came in after that.

[DVTimes]

I can understand thinking that with the fact the BBC article only mentions the 'dad tweet'. If you go back into his timeline, though, it's pretty obvious that me meant to be a prick. Then the death threats came in after that.

sure

however the posts you posted are simply somone saying they think he sucks. get over it.

most people on gfy have said far worse to me and i do not care. i will log off in 5 mins and forget it.

in fact i got over people calling me names at aged 4. i think most people have.

boo hoo.

people seem (on twitter) to be suporting the arrest as they say the swimmer is nice. one wonders if the swimmer did not come accross as nice would people be suporting the arrest as much as they did.

should he (the swimmer) simply not ignored the tweets?

surly if one responds, you end up going back and forth till one gets angry and posts that he will duff you up. i have seen it on gfy when people get upset with each other it esculatyes to threats. but most threats tend to mean nothing as often those who make them often are out of breath just walking up the steps of his mums basment.

[TheDA]

sure

however the posts you posted are simply somone saying they think he sucks. get over it.

The posts Ruby posted include the death threats, check out the first one again. Google has the death threats cached, the media are reporting the death threats.

[DVTimes]

He will probably get off with something less serious if not completely.

i think your right.

unless when interviewd he says somthing stupid, chances are they will just release him.

i cannot see the cps charging him.

that said they did charge that accountent after making that bobe threat. though he has challanged it and now he has been cleared.

it would seem pointless to charge him.

even if they did, i think as soon as he terns 18 they clear his name anyway. unless i am wrong as soon as you tern 18 and convictions are cleared (but i may be wrtong).

[DVTimes]

The posts Ruby posted include the death threats, check out the first one again. Google has the death threats cached, the media are reporting the death threats.

i would suspect that it would simply be argued that the comment was made out of anger, just like thousands of people make each day. like if somone cuts you up when your driving, you may shout out and say your dead when i next see you.


it apears to have been siad as part od an esculated argument, in which he later says sorry for posting.

anyway i suspect as you say he will be released, and thats that.

personaly some of these celebs should grow up and just ignore such posts or not use twitter if they are so sensative.

[sperbonzo]

George Orwell must be spinning in his grave.....






.

[RubyGoodnight]

anyway i suspect as you say he will be released, and thats that.

personaly some of these celebs should grow up and just ignore such posts or not use twitter if they are so sensative.

I agree that this may have not escalated as much as it did if the kid hadn't got Tom Daley's attention. The fact it went viral had a lot to do with the fact that Tom retweeted that Dad comment to his followers. I'm sure the attention got to the kid's head and he went a bit nuts after that.

As far as the kid getting released, he may not get away with it. Something similar happened when Muamba had his heart attack. This guy served time for it, and it wasn't even a death threat. (Although racism seems to be less tolerated in the UK than actual threats of harm, or so I'm learning.) Maybe the fact the kid is a minor may help him out.

[Rochard]

The Rileyy kid also sent death threats. I think that's when the police stepped in.

I figured there was a lot more to it.

People who make posts with misleading titles like this... Are worthless.

[DamianJ]

the reason given is that the coment was unplesent.

also i belive that if it was due to a death threat that under uk law he would have been charged with a different crime.

ie, if i said i am going to beat you up, that (i belive) is classed as assault (just saying the threat is itesf an assalt).

i suspect he will not be charged.

the question is who brought the poloce in, or did they do it themselves. for instance police have to investgate any complaints, but unless somone complains then they tend not to get involved.

for instance i can walk around england (scotish law i think may differ a bit) nude. but its not a crime unless somone tells the police they are upset by me walking around nude.

often you find the police arest people but do not charge.

Fuck off, you spastic content stealing, scamming, fraudulent pikey bumder.

[Ross]

No way, I can't believe in the UK if you insult someone they'll arrest you? Matter of fact, no fucking way........

If you are innocently walking home from the pub you will get harassed by the cops in the UK. My local pub is 300 metres from my house and I can't tell you how many times the cops have stopped me when walking home. I've never been in trouble with the cops in my life, never intend to but they will stop anyone who isn't up to anything.

On the other side I've saw the Police drive by the people that are the whack jobs, they never harass them, never stop them until it's too late unfortunately.

UK cops = assholes!

[_Richard_]

I figured there was a lot more to it.

People who make posts with misleading titles like this... Are worthless.

posts? more like the article itself

[RubyGoodnight]

Harassment warning issued over Daley tweets

The teenager was released on bail while police investigate other communications on his Twitter account and he will return to the police station at a later date.

Looks like he's been released on the initial harassment complaint, but they are still looking into the death threats.

[Hermes]

however the posts you posted are simply somone saying they think he sucks. get over it.

most people on gfy have said far worse to me and i do not care. i will log off in 5 mins and forget it.

in fact i got over people calling me names at aged 4. i think most people have.

boo hoo.

Lot of things were said, and it's up to judges. But who cares if he gets arrested or even a small conviction, the guy sounds like a prick who probably deserves a small lesson anyway. Just get over it..

[Brujah]

Interesting, I hadn't heard of the Malicious Communications Act 1988.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/27/contents

The kid is definitely a prick.

[Shotsie]

No way, I can't believe in the UK if you insult someone they'll arrest you? Matter of fact, no fucking way........

I'm pretty sure this lady got locked up just for going on this rant: