4 Months Jail for 'Offensive' T-Shirt
- Thread starter doofer
- Start date
the guy is a tool, the judge probably took a dislike to him etc etc.
I assume that the judge saw it more as an incident of personal abuse aimed at the loved ones of those killed and that is why he handed out the sentence. In contrast had been wearing a more generic slogan ie '**** the police' or 'kill the police' then he wouldn't have got in trouble.
I assume that the judge saw it more as an incident of personal abuse aimed at the loved ones of those killed and that is why he handed out the sentence. In contrast had been wearing a more generic slogan ie '**** the police' or 'kill the police' then he wouldn't have got in trouble.
Got a few pages to go through so bear with me (at least I had the patience to read them all though 
)
If he really thought he did not do anything wrong then he should have pleaded Not Guilty.
This appears to be a fact that a lot of people are missing. The Judge/Magistrate/Sheriff are only following sentencing guidelines, they are NOT convicting the accused as the accused is convicting themselves by pleading Guilty. If the accused really feels they did not do it then they should plead Not Guilty.
The sentence was probably upped because the crime involved an "attack" on the Police Service itself which is an attack on the crime and justice sector of our country.
Like walking around Manchester in the area that it happened with a t-shirt stating what it did, for all the public and the victims colleagues to see? I say this is purposely going out your way to do it which is what he did.
Because someone has to make a complaint to the police about the offensive messages. I am not sure why people cannot grasp this. The FB and t-shirt cases mentioned came to light because members of the public found it offensive and complained to the police.
Poor example that has been brought up before. Comedy events are normally paid entry. Even if they are not, it is expectant of the people attending that some form of offence may be caused to some sectors of the community as that is what a lot of jokes and comedy stem from i.e. the people attending are placing themselves in a situation where they may be offended and so waive their rights to it
)If he really thought he did not do anything wrong then he should have pleaded Not Guilty.
This appears to be a fact that a lot of people are missing. The Judge/Magistrate/Sheriff are only following sentencing guidelines, they are NOT convicting the accused as the accused is convicting themselves by pleading Guilty. If the accused really feels they did not do it then they should plead Not Guilty.
The sentence was probably upped because the crime involved an "attack" on the Police Service itself which is an attack on the crime and justice sector of our country.
Like walking around Manchester in the area that it happened with a t-shirt stating what it did, for all the public and the victims colleagues to see? I say this is purposely going out your way to do it which is what he did.
Because someone has to make a complaint to the police about the offensive messages. I am not sure why people cannot grasp this. The FB and t-shirt cases mentioned came to light because members of the public found it offensive and complained to the police.
Stand up comedians have been worried for some time about this sort of thing, think how offensive some of their routines are. Roy Chubby Brown anyone? (probably not a good example as maybe he should have been locked up!
Poor example that has been brought up before. Comedy events are normally paid entry. Even if they are not, it is expectant of the people attending that some form of offence may be caused to some sectors of the community as that is what a lot of jokes and comedy stem from i.e. the people attending are placing themselves in a situation where they may be offended and so waive their rights to it
Last edited:
I didn't realise the swear filter would star that word haha, it was a word like swat for avoidance of doubt. My point being that t shirts like that have been around for so long (the cradle of filth jesus is a **** must be at least 10 years old) so why is it now suddenly a problem? While I do feel there should be a line at the absolute extreme stuff (think the church in America can't remember the name - West something church?) but this t shirt or the facebook post while maybe considered bad taste shouldn't be illegal.
I think the problem people are having is the complete inconsistency in these matters. Why do these people get arrested when there is much worse out there and has been for a long time? Why don't BNP/EDL people get arrested? Sickepedia shut down? Frankie Boyle arrested? etc.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,749
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Like Riche said, has anyone actually made a complaint to the Police?
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 12,129
- Location
- Derby
The guy is an idiot. But to be fair i doenst justify a jail sentance but looks like that wasnt for that anyway... What it does justify is taking him round the back of the police station and friends/colleagues of those PCs giving the prat a good drubbing.
I'm rather glad justice doesn't work like that in this country :-/
Oh my God, you're telling me this dirty, scummy excuse for a human being had letters arranged on his T-shirt in a way which hurt other people's feelings? Kill him and his whole family, the human race will never survive with people who are so clearly evil and malevolent.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 12,129
- Location
- Derby
Yes... Because justice in this country works so well.
I dont get your point, if anyone did that to me, I wouldnt want them jailed over it.
And you think the police dragging people round the back of the nick for a shoeing would be an improvement
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,749
- Location
- Southampton, UK
And you think the police dragging people round the back of the nick for a shoeing would be an improvement
TBH, we don't really have the manpower for that. Not with the constant donut trips.
Donut?
I'm completely offended by your use of the American vernacular! it's Doughnut ffs!!
Last edited:
Unsurprisingly, I think the same.
We're both making freedom of speech a binary issue - we would both allow some speech and forbid other speech. So I think your "it isn't binary" argument fails on that basis. The question is where to draw the line on this binary issue - the line between allowed speech and forbidden speech. My position is that if you draw that line on the basis of whether or not it offends someone (who would you give that power to?) then it's not really freedom of speech.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 3,251
There was an episode of South Park where the Queen shoots herself in the head, which even entered the Daily Mail's scope: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...cts-Queens-suicide-plot-conquer-US-fails.html
In light of this precedent, I demand Parker and Stone are immediately extradited to the UK for immediate prosecution.
In light of this precedent, I demand Parker and Stone are immediately extradited to the UK for immediate prosecution.
Wouldn't get anywhere as the US does have a very solid freedom of speech law.