It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Man arrested over fatal crash Facebook photos (UK)

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 06:36 AM

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Whatever happened to social shaming?
Would that not be enough in cases like this?
That is, if they generally disapproved.

I agree with you, and had the guy who took the pictures done it in my community I imagine he would have left town for his own safety by now.
I question the criminal aspect though while it is legal for abortion campaigners to publish images of late term dead babies, never mind the thousands of images of corpses which are posted on social media from war zones and terrorist attacks.
Take the most famous picture recently of that Syrian child dead on the beach, it was on the front page of every newspaper, and online/TV, no blurring of the face, a corpse for everyone to see.
Either corpse images are illegal or they are not, and nobody has the right to privacy in a public place, even dead people.

Now, and I say it again because I know some people will be desperate to accuse me of supporting the guy who took the pictures, I absolutely condemn his actions publishing the crash victim for moral reasons.
I disagree that electronic publication of images or words should have a standard of 'gross offence' where printed or face to face communication does not in UK law.

posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 07:54 AM

originally posted by: foxhound2459
a reply to: oldcarpy

The goose that keeps on giving ?

IMO, The Law society is the enactors of legislation/policy writers of the British judicial system.

It is not for senior civil servants/members of parliment to legislate UK laws.

The 10% rule the 30% that poop on the 60% if you follow my drift.


No, the Law Society is the professional body for Solicitors in England and Wales. It does not enact any legislation. That is done by Parliament.

posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 08:09 AM
Whoever decided to nick (arrest) this guy would have a full-blown seizure if they ever happened across BestG*re.

I agree with other posters; immoral and insensitive on one hand, and simply reporting reality in all of its dark glory on the other - definitely not something he should have been pulled for, in my view.

Some folk just want an honest, uncensored view of the world; the internet isn't always a safe-space.

posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 09:40 AM
a reply to: MerkabaTribeEntity
The law is an absolute mess, the image in the following link is legal to publish online and hold as a poster outside most abortion clinics, warning it is not pretty,: Link who decides this ambiguous term 'grossly offensive', and why is the term not applicable in public order (face to face) law, but solely in electronic communication?

Again, my argument here is not if the guy was morally wrong, I just question should it be a crime to digitally publish a legally taken picture which in itself is not a crime to possess, print off, and share with other humans face to face.

top topics
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in