“Terrifying”: Scottish Police to Investigate “Offensive Comments”

originally posted by: Telos
I don't know some of the expressions you guys talk about and define as racists so I do apologize in advance for that. In North America we're not familiar with some of the "bickering" between scotts and english or ...

However I have to repeat again, Katie Hopkins comments are hardly the issue here. When it comes to limiting our free speech that affects all of us.

I'm all for Ms Hopkins being charged here and here is the reason why. The Politicians made the rules, The police and prosecution service follow the rules. I dont want to see her just because she is a minor TV celeb get off with something the rest of us would be dragged over the coals for.

The best way for all this Orwellian crap to stop is for precedents to be used in a court of law. Case Hopkins V's the State...She gets off with it we all get off with it. Then and only then will our Government have a rethink.

Hmmm...

I think the potential for such a small statement to be misconstrued is high. Indeed, i would say that it seems to have happened already.

Twitter is not a very good platform to express profound ideas or public statements. The limited capacity and restrictions in which one must use to express perspectives is significant. Statements are occasionally misinterpreted by others on Twitter, no thanks to the character limits.

Another thing i will say is that 'offensive comments' made on Twitter are comparable to 'offensive comments' made in real life. People are held legally liable for any wrongdoings they commit, and it applies to their actions on the internet and in the real world. Offensive comments made to someone's face in the real world are taken seriously and investigated by the authorities. Just as they are on the internet.

There may be barriers in online communication, but people should understand that their online actions have real consequences. That people can be arrested, charged and convicted for crimes committed on the internet. It is the law in many nation-states. Personally though, i wouldn't call this statement by the Police Orwellian until a clear abuse of power has occurred, or a further public statement clarifies the potentially murky information.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

I know , but thanks!

But even so, we could all go to Twitter, Facebook or what have you and find someone, somewhere using any one of these labels for either Scots or English, or even Irish if we wanted. There is a line - light hearted jibes such as Jocksville do not warrant wasting Police time to "investigate". As I said, if she had gone down the deliberately offensive route and used other words, they might have a case, but this is really just a case of some bitter twonk in Scotland trying to stuck the knife in.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Yup we are all lowlanders southerners to Highland Folk
However I consider myself a Celt .
Am a Hiberian Fan b t y .

The Romans couldn't subdue us .So they built a wall to keep us at bay.
I love England although I consider myself Scots first British second .

a reply to: stumason

You make a valid point about her being in England...


It makes me wonder if there is a Jurisdiction on Twitter...


I know if I made threats to Obama from London is most likely still get a visit from the Secret Service or some sort of investigation.

I'm not saying she made threats of course, & as I said it depends on the person whether it'll be deemed offensive..
& in saying that now, it'd probably be English Secret Service that investigate that...



So I'm not sure how the Law works when it comes to Twitter or online applications.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
I'm all for Ms Hopkins being charged here and here is the reason why.

Thing is Solo, she won't be as you clearly misunderstand the law and recent CPS guidelines with regards to investigating and prosecuting such offences.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
The Politicians made the rules,

In good faith, to try and make actual offensive or threatening remarks online the same as in real life. As happens with many laws, misunderstandings of the law and in the case of the Robin Hood Airport tweeter there was Political pressure from the DPP Keir Starmer (who overuled CPS advice to drop the case). As it turns out, that man had his conviction quashed as it was ruled to have overstepped the spirit of the law.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
The police and prosecution service follow the rules.

The Police yes, they have to investigate all complaints - the CPS have standing guidelines now as to how to interpet the law. I linked to these earlier.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
I dont want to see her just because she is a minor TV celeb get off with something the rest of us would be dragged over the coals for.

You wouldn't. In fact, it is only the fact she is a minor celebrity (not that I have even heard of her) that is making news and enough people saw her comment to make sure at least someone would complain.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
The best way for all this Orwellian crap to stop is for precedents to be used in a court of law. Case Hopkins V's the State...She gets off with it we all get off with it. Then and only then will our Government have a rethink.

Already done - Robin Hood Airport Twitter man conviction quashed - new CPS guidelines brought in.

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Soloprotocol

I know

, but thanks!

But even so, we could all go to Twitter, Facebook or what have you and find someone, somewhere using any one of these labels for either Scots or English, or even Irish if we wanted. There is a line - light hearted jibes such as Jocksville do not warrant wasting Police time to "investigate". As I said, if she had gone down the deliberately offensive route and used other words, they might have a case, but this is really just a case of some bitter twonk in Scotland trying to stuck the knife in.

The thing about Change.Org, where the petition to have Ms Hopkins arrested originated from," is, once you sign one petition you get bombarded with emails for every petition under the sun. My Guess is a good few people, dare i say it, even some Sassanachs probably signed it such is the hate for this load mouthed erse.

People will sign any old crap nowadays, especially when it's just a matter of click click click and it's done.

Signed a few myself. I'm pretty sure i signedd a petition to free someone from a Bolivian Jail once. Dont know anything about him. dont even know why he was in jail in the first place, but Change.Org told me to do it...Free the Bolivian one.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

It has to apply to where the person was when they made the comment, otherwise we'd all be up on some charge somewhere if anywhere in the Globe could get "offended" or see a "threat".. Unless you commit a hack, in which case that is considered a crime in the location of the computer hardware you accessed not your physical location.

The law is actually quite clear, it's the application of it that needed clearing up and this was done last year (2013).

A comment must be either:

- Communications which may constitute credible threats of violence to the person or damage to property.

- Communications which specifically target an individual or individuals and which may constitute harassment or stalking within the meaning of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

- Communications which may amount to a breach of a court order. This can include offences under the Contempt of Court Act 1981, section 5 of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992, breaches of a restraining order or breaches of bail. Cases where there has been an offence alleged to have been committed under the Contempt of Court Act 1981 or section 5 of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 should be referred to the Attorney General and via the Principal Legal Advisor's team where necessary.

- Communications which do not fall into any of the categories above and fall to be considered separately (see below): i.e. those which may be considered grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or false.

originally posted by: Night Star
Sometimes I worry about the future of our children and what kind of world they will be living in.

Don't be worried, be afraid. Very afraid. They are being raised in a world where being arrested for hurting someone's feelings is normal. When we, the "old timers" are gone...........

a reply to: stumason

sassanack means anyone not born in the highlands and that includes scots from the lowlands .

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Yeah, I know what you mean - I get mails and all sorts for the same sort of thing but thankfully I generally ignore most of them anyway.

It's just like when you get complaints about a TV show or an advert - usually it is barely a dozen people that have complained out of millions but everyone acts like a crime against Humanity has just been thwarted.

a reply to: tom.farnhill

Yep, late to the party, but thanks!

Again, I was well aware of what it meant.... Question is, do you know why the Lowlanders are called sassanacks? Interesting bit of Scottish history there...

I cannot stand this woman.... she is vile and just poisonous.
But I'm not really sure what she said is worthy of arrest or prosecution.
Some of the twitter trolls that have been arrested I've thought deserved it but there doesn't seem to be a lot in this.

If it weren't for ATS' T&C's, i'd show them what i think about their campaign to shut me up. If what i say offends you, don't read what i say. You got the choice to not look.

Oh the flip side of that, how much more policing do we need. How many more laws do they need to make, before they get the point? You can't rule the world. No matter how hard ye may try!

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: tom.farnhill

Yep, late to the party, but thanks!

Again, I was well aware of what it meant.... Question is, do you know why the Lowlanders are called sassanacks? Interesting bit of Scottish history there...

I dont...Pray tell. ?

a reply to: McChillin

I honestly don't know why I bother trying to explain things or put a reasoned argument forward, lets all just believe the "1984" crap and whine about "them" trying to control "us"....

This is simply a case of some bitter Scot sticking the knife in and making a spurious complaint.

Thing is, if you went to the Police and complained about someone calling Scotland "Jocksville" in real life, they'd laugh you out the station or even arrest you for wasting Police time

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Surely you know, Solo?

Lowland Scotland, specifically Edinburgh and it's surroundings, were once part of the Anglo-Saxon Kingdom of Northumbria and settled by "anglo-Saxons", until Edinburgh fell to the Scots in around the 9th century (maybe the 8th, I'd have to check).

The Scots language (Lowland Scots) is also not a Gaelic language, it is in fact a dialect of Old English.

Hence why Highlanders have always had a disdain for the Lowlanders because, well, they're pretty much just English in Tartan skirts...

Keep this thread updated with how many people are jailed over their non-threatening tweets over there in the UK.

I'll be checking it on the hour, because the jails are going to be filled.

a reply to: DrJunk

That would be none, then.

I mean, this woman hasn't even been arrested, much less charged and gone on trial.

a reply to: stumason

Whoever is deciding what is "over the top" is what makes it Orwellian.
Shutting down ANY kind of speech, offensive or not is a bad thing as it can only lead to more censorship and preventing people from stating their true opinions.
It only takes one small rock moved out of place to start and avalanche.