Facebook 'troll' Sean Duffy gets community service for offensive Sophie Taylor image

reply to post by Maponos


Oh apologies then. I am not really a huge fan of anon, but at least they are trying to do something. I thought you were talking about our governments

reply to post by MCJustJ


I agree that he should have had some support to help him out to see why what he did was not right, not necessarily prison time - but thats a court decision.

I apologize for saying you dont know what its like, you are quite correct, i do not know your life. However you came across like it wasnt a big deal, im just saying that it was.

We can at least agree something should happen as a result of his actions. Going around making people feel bad for your own jollies (i cant imagine he was actually trying to prove anything) is bad. Weather it be on the internet, on the phone or face to face, all inappropriate and wrong.

I wont bother trying to compare this to a "conventional" crime as you will pick it apart, this is a new crime because it is a new form of abuse. Do not try to say just because the damage could be fixed with one click, does not mean for a second its not already done the harm it was intended to by the twisted 'troll'.

People who think he should have free speech, are you aware what these RIP trolls are doing ? They set up RIP pages, lure thousands of people in and then post there sick twisted delusions. involving rape and Child porn. they send the grieving family members messeges calling there dead childen whores and sluts etc etc. and will try and get people to commit suicide, all in the name of 'lulz'

All for free speech but this is wrong on so many levels.

It always starts somewhere.

People mention responsibility, well, if you are using Facebook, then you should be responsible for knowing the privacy setting and not allowing random people to post random, perhaps emotionally degrading images, albeit on a public place. Anyone using Facebook should know that if things are supposed to be private and the public is not supposed to get their opinions and actions involved, regardless of what they are or who they might offend - then it should not be placed on the internet.

The man posted a tasteless picture. It offended people. He was indeed imprisoned, in a cell for it, for weeks until trial, and then sentenced community service as well as a removal of some of his basic freedoms. Some people think this is ok? Some people need to learn to fend for themselves in a world where not everything is rainbows and butterflies. Not everyone has to be "nice" and fit in with your agenda and perceptions of logical behavior or else be imprisoned and reprimanded for it.

Now the question remains, how long does it take before you posting joke pictures of political figures and online activism leads to you ending up in a black bag?

All because a few people don't understand that "responsibility" is a two way street.

Is David Wilcock next then?

Yes, suffice it to say, David Wilcock is no different from the numerous schizoaffective pencil-peddlers (the link is just one example) who dominate the 2012 / New Age cultural milieu. I expected an intellectual sparring partner; I got a guy who looks for hidden messages in movie posters.

I say jail time for Wilcock Trolling.

reply to post by gwydionblack


You nailed it right on the head there.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by ModernAcademia

 

I wouldn't doubt it at all. I have been considering closing my facebook a lot lately, but it's how I keep in touch with my friends and family back stateside. Also a few overseas. It's a tough choice really, but who knows when a drunken rant is gonna land me in jail right? Unbelievable.....

You are prone to drunken rants? I think your problem isn't Facebook... It's you

reply to post by groingrinder

There're hate speech laws in the US.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


I have had a few, sure why not. It's hard not to get pissed and rant once in a while, with the way things are going. What does that have to do with being arrested for offending someone though? Drunk, sober, it really don't matter.

reply to post by TKDRL

Bro, he posted an image of her with gunshot wounds and a story about some kids that were killed.

That's harassment. Hate speech. Etc.

That's sadistic and gruesome. And it was in a public forum.

Banning his account on facebook does not do the people involved any justice.

Harassment is not the same thing as teasing. Teasing does not hurt people, harassment does.

reply to post by jonnywhite


I don't believe in hate speech. I don't believe it should be against the law to offend someone with photoshopped pictures or words. That is just how I feel about it.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by TKDRL

 

Bro, he posted an image of her with gunshot wounds and a story about some kids that were killed.

That's harassment. Hate speech. Etc.

That's sadistic and gruesome. And it was in a public forum.

Banning his account on facebook does not do the people involved any justice.

Harassment is not the same thing as teasing. Teasing does not hurt people, harassment does.

edit on 16-3-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

It's pretty messed up, nobody is denying it.

Having said that:
1. Harassment requires repeated forms of interaction that are unwanted. I say "you're a pig" you say "Stop talking to me" if I were to continue on throwing insults, it could then could be argued that I'm harassing you. Posting a picture wouldn't be harassment. If he continued to interact and post pictures after they told him to stop, that might have grounds for harassment.
2. Hate speech requires the disparaging of a person or group based on a specific characteristic. Race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. If he had made it racial or something of that nature which disparaged a specific group then it would be hate speech. There is nothing to indicate that this was the case.

Most laws require some form of repeated interaction to occur that is clearly unwanted. As they say "There's no laws against being a jerk"... literally, a court in Georgia says so:
Georgia court ruling

I think he got what he deserved.Any decent human being wouldn't do something like that.It's like that girl a few years back,her pictures were leaked after a horrific car accident.They were then sent to her parents.I'm sure most of you know who I'm talking about.While the image in the op is shopped,you still don't do something like that.It's disgusting.

Click here for more information.

This wasn't the first time he did something like this.

Apparently he likes to post about dead people or teen suicides.

www.bbc.co.uk...

Natasha MacBryde threw herself under a train after being bullied
Continue reading the main story

A Berkshire man has been jailed for posting abusive messages online about a schoolgirl after she committed suicide.

Sean Duffy, 25, of Reading, was handed an 18-week sentence for posts on social networking sites about Worcestershire teenager Natasha MacBryde.

He previously pleaded guilty at Reading Magistrates' Court to sending indecent or offensive communications.

Police said Duffy also posted abuse about dead teenagers in Northumberland, Gloucestershire and Staffordshire.

Duffy, of Grovelands Road, admitted two offences of "trolling" a term used to describe the trend of anonymously seeking to provoke outrage by posting insults and abuse online.

reply to post by SteelToe


I thought I recogized the guys name.And his photo as well.I have a feeling he's going to keep doing stuff like this.Some people never learn.

i think what alot of the posters are forgetting is that this is a british idiot getting punished under british law so even though he's obviously a few bricks short of legoland he's been found guilty of breaking the law and got punished, while it may not be illegal in america to do what he's done,theres probably as many things that are illegal in the US of A that wouldn't even get the police curious such as being able to drink alcohol from the age of 5 in the home.

reply to post by Maxatoria


Good point. But what if our government were to extradite an american, for breaking their internet rules? Not really a stretch, as we try to do the same thing as well....

you got to hand it to facebook and the cia.

not only has facebook been used to fire disgruntled employees, to divide and conquer the population, destroy friendships, spy and gather intel, it is now being used to actually imprison people.

facebook is much, much more trouble than it's worth.

pick up the phone, you lazy ##SNIPPED## it could save your life, your job, or your freedom.

reply to post by TKDRL


It caused unnecessary pain to her family. Years ago these types of people used to send nasty anonymous letters to families of murder victims, now they use social networking sites instead. Trolling isn't a crime here, but causing unnecessary suffering to another human being is.

There was a similar case recently where the family of a girl who committed suicide started getting messages pretending to be from the girl saying 'mummy it's really hot where I am, I'm burning'.

The idea of the freedom of speech is so that people are not oppressed to not say anything bad or speak out against their government, or employers or where things happen that are wrong, like they are in North Korea and China. It's not meant to be a free for all for anyone with a sick mind to say whatever they like without consequence.