Joey Barton found guilty of sending offensive posts | Given suspended sentence

[The Future’s Blue!]

if you believe it's not acceptable what should be done to deter/stop it?

I can grab a 9 mili?

 

[Stoned Rose]

if you believe it's not acceptable what should be done to deter/stop it?

Not everything that is unacceptable can be stopped. Sometimes people have opinions the majority find unacceptable or have behaviours the majority find unacceptable.

Barton has always been like that. He is an eternal 10 year old with clear mental and emotional deficits. Nothing will change him. He’s been to HMP before and it didn’t bother him. In fact, he probably buzzes off the attention and it makes him feel important.

We know for a fact that the criminalisation of, for example, drug supply and/or possession, doesn’t stop it. Nor does it stop millions of people smoking weed every day or using cocaine at weekend. Criminalising someone like Barton is pointless.

I do not think there is an “answer” to people who do things like this.

You?

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I’m not saying it’s “acceptable”. Of course it isn’t, it’s fucking ridiculous, as is Barton in general.

My original point was I don’t think it that kind of thing should be a criminal offence and it’s certainly not commensurate with being deprived of your liberty in prison, as could have been the case.

It's a criminal offence which has been on the statute since 1997. There is a tariff for punishment which does include a custodial element and is dependent on severity of the offence, previous conduct of the offender and remorse shown at sentencing.

He was very lucky to escape a custodial sentence.

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

An Act to make provision for protecting persons from harassment and similar conduct.

www.legislation.gov.uk

 

[Stoned Rose]

As far as I'm aware from reporting, Barton wasn't convicted for the actual bike nonce comment.

The idea he was convicted for hurty words is just nonsense as he was found not guilty on many of his posts.

He was convicted for other posts which were inciting people to harass.

Which is more than just hurty words.

I await a huge police presence and thousands of arrests for inciting harassment the next time we break into “the referee’s a wanker” or “who’s the bastard in the black” the next time we get shafted by one.

Harassment? Yes. Unpleasant and offensive? Yes. In public? Yes. On tv in front of millions? Yes. Could it “incite” some dickhead to run on the pitch and attack the referee? Yes.

Hmmmm.

 

[Stoned Rose]

It's a criminal offence which has been on the statute since 1997. There is a tariff for punishment which does include a custodial element and is dependent on severity of the offence, previous conduct of the offender and remorse shown at sentencing.

He was very lucky to escape a custodial sentence.

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

An Act to make provision for protecting persons from harassment and similar conduct.

www.legislation.gov.uk

I’m aware of the law. Doesn’t mean I have to agree with it, in this instance.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I’m aware of the law. Doesn’t mean I have to agree with it, in this instance.

If the law didn't exist people could be remorselessly bullied online and attacked by someone else as a result, and the original bully would not be punished despite them being the catalyst for the attack.

There needs to be a mechanism for punishing people who think they can say and do as they please online, knowing it has the potential to cause harm to others.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

It’s all very serious, you do know that this is Joey Barton we’re talking about?

 

[argyle]

I await a huge police presence and thousands of arrests for inciting harassment the next time we break into “the referee’s a wanker” or “who’s the bastard in the black” the next time we get shafted by one.

Harassment? Yes. Unpleasant and offensive? Yes. In public? Yes. On tv in front of millions? Yes. Could it “incite” some dickhead to run on the pitch and attack the referee? Yes.

Hmmmm.

There's a lot of abuse in football that goes too far but there's no law to stop fans chanting generic abuse.

There are laws however to stop indivuals targeting others with malicious communications. You think what he said was just hurty words or banter. On some of the charges the jury agreed, on others the jury thought the very high bar was met.

I'll just keep repeating this.

You think anything goes. I don't. We'll leave it there.

 

[BlueHammer85]

That’s not answering the question mate. And is there evidence that anyone was inundated with thousands of death threats?

Eni Aluko reveals she lost out on work during her case against Joey Barton - Fan Banter

Eni Aluko reveals she lost out on work during her case against Joey Barton, who has been found guilty of sending “grossly offensive” posts. Broadcasters Eni Aluko, Lucy Ward and Jeremy Vine won a legal victory when former footballer Joey Barton was found guilty of six counts of sending “grossly...

fanbanter.co.uk

' it took a personal toll on her, saying she didn’t leave house for a week, left the country, and felt paranoid about physical and death threats, with online abuse amplified by smaller accounts '

No doubt Vine received the same and a clear correlation from the troll abuse by Barton to all the millions of accounts that saw his attacks on him.

 

[Stoned Rose]

There's a lot of abuse in football that goes too far but there's no law to stop fans chanting generic abuse.

There are laws however to stop indivuals targeting others with malicious communications. You think what he said was just hurty words or banter. On some of the charges the jury agreed, on others the jury thought the very high bar was met.

I'll just keep repeating this.

You think anything goes. I don't. We'll leave it there.

There are loads of laws that capture disorder / public order at football, so that’s incorrect but yes leave it there, sound by me.

 

[blue for life]

An awful person. Makes me ashamed to be a human being

 

[west didsblue]

JBIAC

I think we can all agree on that.

 

[We've got Guardiola]

Not everything that is unacceptable can be stopped. Sometimes people have opinions the majority find unacceptable or have behaviours the majority find unacceptable.

Barton has always been like that. He is an eternal 10 year old with clear mental and emotional deficits. Nothing will change him. He’s been to HMP before and it didn’t bother him. In fact, he probably buzzes off the attention and it makes him feel important.

We know for a fact that the criminalisation of, for example, drug supply and/or possession, doesn’t stop it. Nor does it stop millions of people smoking weed every day or using cocaine at weekend. Criminalising someone like Barton is pointless.

I do not think there is an “answer” to people who do things like this.

You?

Had this been done by anybody except Barton then he wouldn't have been given a prison sentence. He got a prison sentence (albeit suspended) because he has a long history of assault, wife beating and generally being a shithead.

The people who said those things on Twitter in the riots last year were similarly put in prison because all of them had been in trouble before or they were literally threatening to kill people and/or incite violence. I'm pretty sure that one of the people put in prison for tweets was a convicted nonce. How can anybody have an issue with this?

Chaos isn't the answer, there has to be a line drawn and that line can only be dealt with in law by making it a criminal offence. If it isn't a criminal offence then anybody can say anything and countless victims will be open to abuse. In Vine's case he had to consider his personal safety because of the unwanted words of some twat on twitter.

If Barton doesn't have an issue with going to prison and wants to tweet and abuse people freely then that's fine. In that case the law is very effective because it deals with this by putting him in prison where he can't tweet anymore.

If prison isn't effective for drugs, murder or whatever then why do we have prisons at all? Why don't we just release murderers and tell them to never do it again? Deterrence isn't even the objective of prison, it's about punishment and justice and issuing that punishment is more complex than simply person X did Y.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Had this been done by anybody except Barton then he wouldn't have been given a prison sentence. He got a prison sentence (albeit suspended) because he has a long history of assault, wife beating and generally being a shithead.

The people who said those things on Twitter in the riots last year were similarly put in prison because all of them had been in trouble before or they were literally threatening to kill people and/or incite violence. I'm pretty sure that one of the people put in prison for tweets was a convicted nonce. How can anybody have an issue with this?

Chaos isn't the answer, there has to be a line drawn and that line can only be dealt with in law by making it a criminal offence. If it isn't a criminal offence then anybody can say anything and countless victims will be open to abuse. In Vine's case he had to consider his personal safety because of the unwanted words of some twat on twitter.

If Barton doesn't have an issue with going to prison and wants to tweet and abuse people freely then that's fine. In that case the law is very effective because it deals with this by putting him in prison where he can't tweet anymore.

If prison isn't effective for drugs, murder or whatever then why do we have prisons at all? Why don't we just release murderers and tell them to never do it again? Deterrence isn't even the objective of prison, it's about punishment and justice and issuing that punishment is more complex than simply person X did Y.

Imagine thinking people can’t post tweets from prison.