Graham Linehan arrested for tweets

Originally Posted by Taf

Did Starmer direct judges to come down hard on dissenters? I suppose we'll never know. But the disparity in sentencing between Connolly and Jones shows that some judges are very fickle in how they deal with direct or perceived threats against people, both online and in public.

Nothing to do with Judges - Jones was found not guilty by a jury, so there was no sentence…

You may wish to read what Melanie Philips had to say, and she is somewhat to the Right on the political Spectrum.

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/col...tice-z60xh6psc

Non-paywall version

https://archive.ph/CEOPK

Originally Posted by Taf

Did Starmer direct judges to come down hard on dissenters? I suppose we'll never know. But the disparity in sentencing between Connolly and Jones shows that some judges are very fickle in how they deal with direct or perceived threats against people, both online and in public.

I am not sure he directed judges directly, but there was a general attitude across the system to go in hard on the rioters. The same happened in the Tottenham Riots 10 or so years ago.

When there is mass civil disorder, we tend to give harsher sentences to stamp down on it and make people think twice. Such riots tend to have a sense of excited momentum, where people lose their minds and see it all as very exciting. Then they hear someone is going to prison, it snaps them back to their senses.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Taf

Did Starmer direct judges to come down hard on dissenters? I suppose we'll never know. But the disparity in sentencing between Connolly and Jones shows that some judges are very fickle in how they deal with direct or perceived threats against people, both online and in public.

He implied it. but it's tenuous.

He said rioters would feel the "full force of the law" but any PM would say that, and in regards to actual "rioters" I don't think anyone would disagree.

Not so sure about tweets though.

[Dude111]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I see we have had yet another person arrested for posting on X.

Yea its scary one can be treated badly JUST FOR STUFF HE SAYS ONLINE!!

I think anonymous posting on sites like that X site are beneficial!!

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Chris

Graham Linehan was arrested by 5 armed police officers as he arrived at Heathrow yesterday. His crime? Tweeting that a man cosplaying as a woman in a woman’s toilet is committing a violent act and must be resisted, and if all else failed ‘kicked in the b0ll0cks’.

Graham Linehan believes he knows which particularly unhinged gender activist reported his tweets to the police. That activist might be advised to reflect on whether he’s advanced his cause at all, given the backlash today. Even Owen Jones has been forced to defend Linehan’s right to say stuff Jones himself vehemently disagrees with. The only person who seems to have made a bold defence of the police is the new leader of the Green Party of England and Wales, who made a spectacle of himself on Newsnight last night by claiming it was reasonable and proportionate to send 5 coppers to intercept Linehan, keep him in custody for 18 hours and then ban him from Twitter as a bail condition.

Now even the Met Police commissioner, no less, has weighed in, demanding that the law and guidance that goes with it is changed because officers, he claims, are being forced to act in situations where he seems to think they shouldn’t have to.

This is what happens when you try to legislate what people can and can’t say, by centring the hurty feelings of people who claim that ‘words are violence.’

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mx09l5297o



I started off posting this in the gender ideology thread but the issue is far broader than the subject Linehan chose to tweet about. We have sleep-walked into a position where police are going in mob-handed against popular comedians for making obviously satirical, if somewhat angry, social media comments. We are in danger of becoming the laughing stock of the ‘free’ world.

From what the BBC lunchtime news said today, there is more to this than this single incident and it appears that Linehan & the transgender activist have had a history of incidents since he was 17.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

From what the BBC lunchtime news said today, there is more to this than this single incident and it appears that Linehan & the transgender activist have had a history of incidents since he was 17.

I think it’s fair to say that you have misunderstood events completely.

Today’s court case is unconnected with the reason for his arrest earlier this week.

[1andrew1]

Is this a classic case of the law being one step behind technology?

No, I think it’s a case of a small, well organised, highly motivated group of activists misrepresenting the law over many years. Since the Supreme Court judgement in FWS V Scottish Ministers (the judgment that clarifies what sex means in the equality act) a term has entered discourse: “Stonewall Law” - which describes equalities legislation as misrepresented by Stonewall as a provider of workplace diversity training. Stonewall and others have thoroughly corrupted enough of our public life that they can always find a police officer senior enough to trigger into taking actions like these.

The Free Speech Union furthermore believes that even under existing law there were no grounds for arresting Linehan in this case. They are assisting him in suing the Met for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment.

The Met Commissioner is squealing about the law needing changed but the police in this case clearly had discretion which they chose not to use. Nice comment piece on it all here:

https://archive.ph/VNm5d

At the risk of being handcuffed for causing “distress”, “alarm” or “anxiety”, I say: “Sir Mark, you disingenuous muppet, you!” It’s perfectly clear that the police have discretion to ignore complaints, even crimes, if they want to. Let’s see now:
Phone theft – ignored.
Shoplifting – essentially legal.
Carjacking – we’ll send you a crime number.
Burglaries – help yourself, lads!
Sexual harassment, child gang rape – er, sorry, cultural sensitivities.
For Sir Mark to claim that his officers were unable to use their common sense and ignore a complaint from a notorious trans activist about the Father Ted creator is to insult the public’s intelligence.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Farage currently in US, laying boot into it all.

The hypocrisy is breath-taking. Trump has banned the Associated Press because it refused to call the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America but Farage is happy to associate himself with them. And Reform banned journalists from its conference who disagreed with Farage.

The arrest of Linehan was daft and I hope that the Met and other police forces learn from this mistake.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Reform banned journalists from its conference who disagreed with Farage.

I’ve explained this either here or on another thread.

Reform, or anyone refusing to to speak to anyone, excluding certain journalists is not a restriction of free speech. If you don’t understand that, you don’t understand free speech.

Free speech is also the freedom not to speak to certain people you don’t want to.

Forcing people to speak to people, is the opposite of free speech.

---------- Post added at 20:46 ---------- Previous post was at 20:43 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

The arrest of Linehan was daft and I hope that the Met and other police forces learn from this mistake.

Not only daft but, apparently, unlawful. Which is worrying.