What is an 'internet troll'?

[Alice Purjorick]

There is absolutely no question at all that the McCanns have been subjected to the same sort of hateful online activities as Fusilier Rigby's family, the only mystery is why the McCanns have not sought to have charges brought against the worst offenders, indeed Spivey could well have been done for his online activities against them IMO.  The other mystery is why those that torment the McCanns in the way Spivey did the Rigbys aren't busy setting up a Fund for him, in the name of justice, free speach (sic) etc.

1 Uncertainty of outcome possibly.
2 What makes you think they are not? People set up funds for the most bizarre of reasons.
Do you remember the very short lived "Save Freddy Laker Fund" ?. Now that really was wacko.

[faithlilly]

Firstly, Edam cheese tends not to have holes.
Secondly, suggesting that the McCanns covered up the death of their daughter and hid her body, repeatedly making such a claim, creating website(s) to promote this theory, re-tweeting crude photoshop images in the name of "satire", circulating the McCanns home address and google images of their house etc, is pretty much exactly what many "sceptics" have done over the years and these activities differ very little from the activities of Spivey.  What exactly is your view of Chris Spivey, him also being a McCann "sceptic" and all?   Is he a troll? Are his activities acceptable in the name of "freedom of speach (sic)"?  How about a straight answer from JF "sceptic" on this man's behaviour?

I'm sure if we look hard enough we'd find a member of a fanatical far right organisation who also thinks the McCanns are innocent. Is he morally then similar to you ?

BTW Spivey to me seems to be an attention seeker who will say anything to get noticed. If he has broken the law while indulging in this 'hobby' he deserves to be punished.

[G-Unit]

There is absolutely no question at all that the McCanns have been subjected to the same sort of hateful online activities as Fusilier Rigby's family, the only mystery is why the McCanns have not sought to have charges brought against the worst offenders, indeed Spivey could well have been done for his online activities against them IMO.  The other mystery is why those that torment the McCanns in the way Spivey did the Rigbys aren't busy setting up a Fund for him, in the name of justice, free speach (sic) etc.

There was a dossier given to the police detailing what you say were 'the same sort of hateful online activities to which the McCanns were subjected'. The police and the CPS found those activities were not worthy of prosecution, so they must have been different. I assume the McCanns were aware of the dossier if it was their family who handed it over.(as Hogan-Howe suggested). Ergo no-one has 'tormented the McCanns in the way Spivey did the Rigbys', or they would have been arrested too.

[Alfred R Jones]

There was a dossier given to the police detailing what you say were 'the same sort of hateful online activities to which the McCanns were subjected'. The police and the CPS found those activities were not worthy of prosecution, so they must have been different. I assume the McCanns were aware of the dossier if it was their family who handed it over.(as Hogan-Howe suggested). Ergo no-one has 'tormented the McCanns in the way Spivey did the Rigbys', or they would have been arrested too.

The dossier was compiled and handed to the police by McCann family supporters, not by the McCanns themselves - read the news reports of the time.  BHH was wrong, obviously.  Having been an observer myself of some of the online activities against the McCanns over the years I can state hand on heart that these differ in no substantive  way to the activities of Spivey.  There really is little or no difference, so either the police are not being even-handed in the way they go after trolls and online hate-merchants, or they are powerless to act unless the complaint comes directly from those suffering the abuse themselves.  It is my belief that the latter is the most likely reason why some of the worst McCann "sceptics" have not been dealt with in the same way as Spivey.   Perhaps if and when the McCanns get closure on their daughter's disappearance it will be time to go after these people cos they sure as hell ain't going to stop their tormenting any time soon.

[Alfred R Jones]

I'm sure if we look hard enough we'd find a member of a fanatical far right organisation who also thinks the McCanns are innocent. Is he morally then similar to you ?

BTW Spivey to me seems to be an attention seeker who will say anything to get noticed. If he has broken the law while indulging in this 'hobby' he deserves to be punished.

What aspects of Spivey's behaviour then do you believe were illegal, because I can see very little difference between what he has done to the Rigbys and what some of the McCann "sceptics" have and are doing to Madeleine's family on a daily basis. 

[Carew]

The dossier was compiled and handed to the police by McCann family supporters, not by the McCanns themselves - read the news reports of the time.  BHH was wrong, obviously.  Having been an observer myself of some of the online activities against the McCanns over the years I can state hand on heart that these differ in no substantive  way to the activities of Spivey.  There really is little or no difference, so either the police are not being even-handed in the way they go after trolls and online hate-merchants, or they are powerless to act unless the complaint comes directly from those suffering the abuse themselves.  It is my belief that the latter is the most likely reason why some of the worst McCann "sceptics" have not been dealt with in the same way as Spivey.  Perhaps if and when the McCanns get closure on their daughter's disappearance it will be time to go after these people cos they sure as hell ain't going to stop their tormenting any time soon.

Were that the case, might the police have said so, instead of what Sky News reported below?


In a letter to the campaigners, Leicestershire Police Assistant Chief Constable Roger Bannister said: "While finding that much of the material was extremely distasteful and unpleasant in nature, it was determined that none of the messages/postings constituted a prosecutable offence."



http://news.sky.com/story/1475870/mccann-trolls-police-wont-take-action

[stephen25000]

The dossier was compiled and handed to the police by McCann family supporters, not by the McCanns themselves - read the news reports of the time.  BHH was wrong, obviously.  Having been an observer myself of some of the online activities against the McCanns over the years I can state hand on heart that these differ in no substantive  way to the activities of Spivey.  There really is little or no difference, so either the police are not being even-handed in the way they go after trolls and online hate-merchants, or they are powerless to act unless the complaint comes directly from those suffering the abuse themselves.  It is my belief that the latter is the most likely reason why some of the worst McCann "sceptics" have not been dealt with in the same way as Spivey.   Perhaps if and when the McCanns get closure on their daughter's disappearance it will be time to go after these people cos they sure as hell ain't going to stop their tormenting any time soon.

No alfred.

It is known the mccanns handed the dossier to the police.

[faithlilly]

What aspects of Spivey's behaviour then do you believe were illegal, because I can see very little difference between what he has done to the Rigbys and what some of the McCann "sceptics" have and are doing to Madeleine's family on a daily basis.

I have no idea what aspects of Spivey's behaviour were illegal as I do what most sensible people do when they don't like what someone is posting on the internet and that's ignore it.

[Alfred R Jones]

Were that the case, might the police have said so, instead of what Sky News reported below?


In a letter to the campaigners, Leicestershire Police Assistant Chief Constable Roger Bannister said: "While finding that much of the material was extremely distasteful and unpleasant in nature, it was determined that none of the messages/postings constituted a prosecutable offence."



http://news.sky.com/story/1475870/mccann-trolls-police-wont-take-action

How does this contradict what I wrote?

[Alfred R Jones]

I have no idea what aspects of Spivey's behaviour were illegal as I do what most sensible people do when they don't like what someone is posting on the internet and that's ignore it.

That's not true though is it?  You read and comment on plenty that you don't like on the internet.

[Carew]

How does this contradict what I wrote?

The content of the messages, rather than the person/s who submitted them was mentioned in the police report with regard to prosecution (or lack of it.)

You seemed to feel that had the same complaints been submitted by the McCanns themselves, the outcome might have been different.

[Eleanor]

No alfred.

It is known the mccanns handed the dossier to the police.

Only according to "Another Place."  There is no proof.  Although I wouldn't care if it was The McCanns.  Are you saying that they shouldn't have done?

[stephen25000]

Only according to "Another Place."  There is no proof.  Although I wouldn't care if it was The McCanns.  Are you saying that they shouldn't have done?

You mean BHH ?

Have the people on the list broken the law ?

[Eleanor]

You mean BHH ?

Have the people on the list broken the law ?

Do we know if any of them have been cautioned, or even told to stop it?

Laffin Assassin was.

[stephen25000]

Do we know if any of them have been cautioned, or even told to stop it?

Laffin Assassin was.

I believe some action was taken against him.

I exchanged 'pleasantries' with him at one time.

He attacked me, calling me a mccann sympathizer, or the equivalent in less than 'complimentary' terms.