Ann Widdecombe has died, murder suspected

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by jem

Damien, hypothetically we meet up in person, and I tell you to your face that I ‘hope your mother/father/child dies screaming in agony from cancer’? Would you a) just accept it as my opinion; or b) punch me very hard in the face?

I suspect b), which actually makes YOU the criminal here. Yes OK you could probably claim you were provoked and get a reduced fine. But think about it, I have ‘said some words’ that have provoked you to commit a criminal act.

Is that OK?

---------- Post added at 20:34 ---------- Previous post was at 20:32 ----------



A trans-woman, him, her, whatever. Either way a particularly unpleasant human being.

In fairness I would do what every snowflake does and shout leave me alone I feel in danger your words are an assault "OFFICER".

Assault does not have to include any contact just the impression and fear that contact could occur. 2026 = a country of nancy boys in more ways than one

As some Twitter wag observed this morning, Scott “Heather” Herbert uses FOI requests the way other people use Google. He has quite a record.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/user/...herbert?page=1

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Yes, we don't have the absolute right to say whatever we feel like without any possible consequences. The offending comments were said before it was known it was a murder, but even if it had of been death by natural causes, it was still an unpleasant thing to say.

Once the death was confirmed as being a murder, the perpetrator refused to apologise.

Why should it be an arrestable offence? This is the police turning up at your house to arrest you for saying something offensive, no incitement to violence, just people being nasty online.

I am all for platforms banning trolls/nasty people, but there is a whole other level to facing criminal proceedings and all the stress and consequences that come with it.

The law needs to change on some of this stuff.

Originally Posted by Damien

Why should it be an arrestable offence? This is the police turning up at your house to arrest you for saying something offensive, no incitement to violence, just people being nasty online.

I am all for platforms banning trolls/nasty people, but there is a whole other level to facing criminal proceedings and all the stress and consequences that come with it.

The law needs to change on some of this stuff.

It does. But perhaps the law needed to be seen for what it is first. It has been misused against people who, you might say, are critics of the new State religion of Ekwalitee and Diversitee, wantonly and outrageously over the past couple of years. Graham Linehan being arrested by armed police at Heathrow and questioned for hours being an egregious recent example (Linehan wasn’t even charged in that case, and the Met has just had to pay him £25k compo).

Now it’s being used against one of the poster girls boys of EDI, a middle-aged man in a dress, who said hurty things about a right-wing politician, suddenly we’re up in arms about how draconian this all is.

Funny, that.

Originally Posted by Chris

It does. But perhaps the law needed to be seen for what it is first. It has been misused against people who, you might say, are critics of the new State religion of Ekwalitee and Diversitee, wantonly and outrageously over the past couple of years. Graham Linehan being arrested by armed police at Heathrow and questioned for hours being an egregious recent example (Linehan wasn’t even charged in that case, and the Met has just had to pay him £25k compo).

Now it’s being used against one of the poster girls boys of EDI, a middle-aged man in a dress, who said hurty things about a right-wing politician, suddenly we’re up in arms about how draconian this all is.

Funny, that.

People were up in arms then as well, just a different set of people.

Originally Posted by Damien

People were up in arms then as well, just a different set of people.

Indeed.

The Free Speech Union has offered to assist Herbert if he reaches out to them, even though much of their caseload comes from those getting persecuted for knowing that men in dresses are, in fact , still men (and Herbert’s highly visible online activities suggest he’s enthusiastically involved in that).

I am seriously considering joining the FSU myself.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

Why should it be an arrestable offence? This is the police turning up at your house to arrest you for saying something offensive, no incitement to violence, just people being nasty online.

I am all for platforms banning trolls/nasty people, but there is a whole other level to facing criminal proceedings and all the stress and consequences that come with it.

The law needs to change on some of this stuff.

It's called incitement. Because the comments encourage others to carry out attacks on other people with similar views as Ann Widdecombe. And her murder may well be an example of that.

Originally Posted by nomadking

It's called incitement. Because the comments encourage others to carry out attacks on other people with similar views as Ann Widdecombe. And her murder may well be an example of that.

I think we need to be careful as to what qualifies as incitement. Posting negatively about people could cause someone of unsound mind to resort to violence, but I don't think that is enough. The standard needs to be whether a reasonable person reading the statement would think it's encouraging or promoting violence. Additionally, maybe lying about someone in a way that might encourage violence against them (such as saying 'Mr FakeName at 123 Fake Street is a nonce') would qualify.

If you start making random connections between a negative statement and violence, then you could justify arresting all sorts of people. To give an example, there is a trend in politics to call other democratically elected politicians 'traitors'. I hate this. I think it sours political discourse and is dangerous in that it amps tensions and hate, which in turn could lead to political violence. After all, real traitors have often been met with violence. But I don't think that it should be an arrestable offence. If they were to start putting mentions of violence as well as calling people traitors, then it would be.

We need to start from a place where there needs to be a high threshold to meet for the police to visit you and arrest you. I would imagine that's a traumatic experience (not to mention a waste of police time).

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

I think we need to be careful as to what qualifies as incitement. Posting negatively about people could cause someone of unsound mind to resort to violence, but I don't think that is enough. The standard needs to be whether a reasonable person reading the statement would think it's encouraging or promoting violence. Additionally, maybe lying about someone in a way that might encourage violence against them (such as saying 'Mr FakeName at 123 Fake Street is a nonce') would qualify.

If you start making random connections between a negative statement and violence, then you could justify arresting all sorts of people. To give an example, there is a trend in politics to call other democratically elected politicians 'traitors'. I hate this. I think it sours political discourse and is dangerous in that it amps tensions and hate, which in turn could lead to political violence. After all, real traitors have often been met with violence. But I don't think that it should be an arrestable offence. If they were to start putting mentions of violence as well as calling people traitors, then it would be.

We need to start from a place where there needs to be a high threshold to meet for the police to visit you and arrest you. I would imagine that's a traumatic experience (not to mention a waste of police time).

Saying they're glad a particular person is dead because of X, is clearly incitement.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Saying they're glad a particular person is dead because of X, is clearly incitement.

It clearly means they’re a deeply unpleasant person. But in what way does being glad about something demonstrably incite someone else to do anything criminal?

[Carth]

Seen many posts in various places by people wishing Putin was dead, and would be happy to see it . . . can't remember seeing any of them subsequently arrested.

Context and circumstances I guess

Further discussion and speculation on X this morning suggests this actually isn’t about the Widdecombe tweet any more. Herbert lives in Scotland and seems to have been charged under the SNP/Green rather draconian Hate Crime & Public Order(Scotland) Act 2021. It seems unlikely that the tweet would breach that Act, however, once the spotlight is turned on some of his other activities, they’re … unpleasant. And quite possibly offences under that Act. He is part of a trans extremist group called Bash Back whose demands for direct action against critics of gender ideology are concerning. He’s also associated with people who believe that ‘If people don’t show love … show bullets.’ Charming.

Of course whether that Act itself is a reasonable piece of legislation or a draconian attempt at legislating to enforce a certain sort of left-wing social discourse in Scottish society is another matter.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Saying they're glad a particular person is dead because of X, is clearly incitement.

Incitement to do what exactly ?

The ‘further consideration’ undertaken by Polis Scotland seems to have led them to charge him based on things other than his tweet about Widdecombe. That tweet brought him to their attention, whereupon someone clearly went WTAF and started taking these fools seriously.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/s...hared-37435488