It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Blogger In Court for Obscene Post

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 03:51 AM
link   

Blogger In Court for Obscene Post


ne ws.sky.com

A civil servant is being prosecuted for the alleged publication of a blog with details of the kidnap, torture, mutilation and murder of pop band Girls Aloud.

Darryn Walker is accused of writing the obscene article and posting it on a fantasy porn website.

The blog, called 'Girls (Scream) Aloud' is said to be 12 pages long and described the killing of the band members.
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 3/10/2008 by skibtz]




posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 03:51 AM
link   
I am not so sure about this. In court for a blog entry?

I am sure that the internet harbours far worse content than a man and his fantasy?

Youtube has a wealth of videos of people fighting, getting maimed and even killed.

I am not so sure that the written word in the context of a mans fantasy about a pop group can be considered dangerous.

The man could be dangerous and maybe there is an argument have him mentally evaluated but a court appearance seems way over the top!

I am all for some control over the masses but when you start banging up people for writings then it is time to start worrying!

ne ws.sky.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 3/10/2008 by skibtz]



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 04:42 AM
link   
What can he even be charged with? Is some [anti]fan-fiction enough to charge him with conspiracy?



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 06:03 AM
link   
This is a weird one and one that will probably have ramifications by setting precedents.

I love the idea that the internet gives people a platform to create rather than consume. I'm sure that there's more people writing fanzines, opinion pieces, sharing artworks and so on than any other time in history. It's a fantastic social leveller in that sense, you don't necessarily have to gone through college, then university, then having the right background before becoming a journalist or writer and being 'allowed' to share your musings with an audience.

However, being able to 'publish' rather than just keep those musings private means going into some strange waters and potentially crossing some lines. If, hypothetically, I dreamed of killing an American president that's fair enough. I might even tell my partner, co-workers and so on, 'hey, last night, I had this really messed-up dream...' but if I wrote a blog about killing the American president, in graphic detail over 12 pages, it might raise a few eyebrows not to mention questions.

Similarly, if someone dreams of raping or even having consensual sex with my partner - never mind actually killing her - there's not much she or I can do about it. However, if someone started writing stories about raping or killing her and then published them on the internet, I'd be more than a little concerned, not to mention actually interested in meeting the man who'd written it.

If these people were characters, much like Star Trek or Harry Potter fanfic, then it would be a different matter, but ultimately, this band are real people. I accept that these people are in the public eye and to an extent, even public property but where do you draw the line?



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Apart from harbouring a healthy disdain for the band in question, what has he done wrong exactly?

I smell a Max Clifford somewhere in this mix.



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 08:13 AM
link   
I'm so glad he got in trouble for that one.

If there are no standards on the internet, the way there are standards on TV, there's no telling how horrible it would get in here. People are sick. People have competitions of who is the sickest. Thoughts breed actions. People with no foresight have a hard time understanding this. Put the beer down and try to think past today.

OK, maybe some people are intelligent enough to not do the things they see or think about, but there are far more people who would be easily influenced by bandwagon-style sick influences. We live in a country of sheeple. It needs to be regulated.



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by mmariebored
 


Get over yourself . If you cant chose to look away . Then what good is free will . (They taught you this in kindergarten)
Yeah he posted some crap on HIS blog . Simple .. Don't sign up for his RSS feed.

Whats next are we going to toss Steven king in jail ?
What about other authors? First amendment what?

I dont care if he had a blog dedicated to the killing and maiming of my family . Its his right to do so . And my free will to ignore it !

[edit on 3-10-2008 by d11_m_na_c05]



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by d11_m_na_c05
reply to post by mmariebored
 


Get over yourself . If you cant chose to look away . Then what good is free will . (They taught you this in kindergarten)
Yeah he posted some crap on HIS blog . Simple .. Don't sign up for his RSS feed.

Whats next are we going to toss Steven king in jail ?
What about other authors? First amendment what?

I dont care if he had a blog dedicated to the killing and maiming of my family . Its his right to do so . And my free will to ignore it !

[edit on 3-10-2008 by d11_m_na_c05]

Get over YOUR self. I think people who sell their nightmares to the masses need to be shipped away to a scary island where they can all freak each other out forever.



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by mmariebored
 


Man i hope you have had a vasectomy ..

For one .. Nothing was sold.
For two FREEDOM OF SPEECH .

For three, I hope all you constitution hating fascists are shipped of to Guantanamo cube to be tortured till you realize THIS IS NOT CHINA!!

If you dont like the constitution/bill of rights . LEAVE!



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 09:29 AM
link   
...When ever some horrific crime happens,like a school shooting people always say..."If only there was a sign" or "if we HAD just payed MORE attention TOO the signs,than maybe this would not have happened"... ...But each and every time something "pre-emptive" like this takes place,people don't wanna hear it...LOL ...Can't have it both ways...And although i MAY agree,court cases are a lil bit over the top...Some sort of evaluation is NOT out of the question...I mean...If you wanna write it,go ahead,but,don't be TOO surprised when someone wants to ask you about it later...LOL



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by d11_m_na_c05
reply to post by mmariebored
 


Get over yourself . If you cant chose to look away . Then what good is free will . (They taught you this in kindergarten)
Yeah he posted some crap on HIS blog . Simple .. Don't sign up for his RSS feed.

Whats next are we going to toss Steven king in jail ?
What about other authors? First amendment what?

I dont care if he had a blog dedicated to the killing and maiming of my family . Its his right to do so . And my free will to ignore it !

[edit on 3-10-2008 by d11_m_na_c05]


What's all this you keep posting about a constitution, bill of rights and the first amendment? They're hardly applicable to this story.



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 03:25 PM
link   
It seems quite an extreme reaction imo.

I think that the authorities (which?) should have contacted the individual and asked them to remove the offending blog entry. Failing this the host could have been contacted so that they may remove the content themselves.

Of course, this is an aside to another issue which is that of free speech.

First off, (I think) it was on a fantasy porn site. Does the fact that it is already on a questionable platform make a difference? I don't know. What I think does make a difference is the fact that it was text.

If someone had thrust a pageful of photorealistic images depiciting the scenes involved then there may be a case to have them removed. The images have been consumed immediately with little or no chance to avoid them thus removing my freedom of choice. However, we are talking about a passage of text. If you are able to read 12 pages of text that you find totally disgusting and seriously offensive then you are probably kidding yourself of one of two things: you do not really care or you are a little unhinged yourself!


Although I suspect the main point is that the text could be read by someone who then goes on to commit similar acts as a direct/indirect result.

This being the case, if you are going to ban texts like this on the internet then you may need to remove half the content of libraries and bookstores that provide access to books that can 'deprave and corrupt'.

Such books could include religious tomes (The Bible, Koran et al), survival techniques, army hardware, business strategies, horror stories, romantic novels, fantatsy novels and I think that the list could go on and on because you could in theory pick up a book on flowers and learn, through a light-hearted mention, that some flowers are extremely poisonous and use this information to nefarious ends.

It may be the case that the person who wrote the article is now fearful of the repercussions of what he considered to be a relevant blog entry on a like-minded site. His life will no doubt be made, at the very least, more interesting for the foreseeable future in terms of his personal, work and social circles.

Has he made a boo-boo? Probably. Should the (internet) cops have asked him/the host to remove the material before the media explosion? Almost certainly and if I was the author of the blog entry I would be asking why this was not done.

Edit: In bold

[edit on 3/10/2008 by skibtz]



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mmariebored
 


We need internet regulation like I need a hole in my head. You are falling for their trap, they want to regulate the internet so you have to pay a subscription fee to visit each site, just like tv channels.

Welcome to the "downtown436 list of shills, disinfo agents, and other disagreeable characters".



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by downtown436
reply to post by mmariebored
 


We need internet regulation like I need a hole in my head. You are falling for their trap, they want to regulate the internet so you have to pay a subscription fee to visit each site, just like tv channels.

Welcome to the "downtown436 list of shills, disinfo agents, and other disagreeable characters".

Many sites are privately owned and DO charge for full content. It's happening more and more already. What does that have to do with cleaning up foul content or defamation content, and in this case, content that can be very hurtful to the families of the victims. Don't the victims have rights too? If you drive by an accident, should the police NOT cover the bloody bodies or is that, too, restricting the people's right to know?

Internet regulations isn't, and can never be, a black and white issue.




top topics



 
1

log in

join