Investigation into McCann internet trolls launched by police

[stephen25000]

An interesting point.  Most people post under an anonymous username, here, and on other social media.   Can an a pseudonym sue for defamtion?  Can it be insulted?  Can it be threatened? 

I do not know the answer as it has not been tested in court. 

The problems come when there is a collision between a pseudonym and real life.  When someone using a pseudonym defames a real and identifyable person.  Or when someone who has been a bit overenthusiastic in their posting is unmasked. 

If everyone obeyed the simple rule - "never post any anything you would not say if the subject were standing in front of you" then all would be fine.

And before you go off on one - that applies to posters on both sides.

I agree with you on this .

[Alice Purjorick]

An interesting point.  Most people post under an anonymous username, here, and on other social media.   Can an a pseudonym sue for defamtion?  Can it be insulted?  Can it be threatened? 

I do not know the answer as it has not been tested in court. 

The problems come when there is a collision between a pseudonym and real life.  When someone using a pseudonym defames a real and identifyable person.  Or when someone who has been a bit overenthusiastic in their posting is unmasked. 

If everyone obeyed the simple rule - "never post any anything you would not say if the subject were standing in front of you" then all would be fine.

And before you go off on one - that applies to posters on both sides.

An admirable sentiment with which I concur. Unfortunately the world we inhabit is not like that and "that tinternet" probably made it worse.

[Jean-Pierre]

An admirable sentiment with which I concur. Unfortunately the world we inhabit is not like that and "that tinternet" probably made it worse.

That is true, Alice.  And the anonymity afforded by the internet means that some people get carried away, and say things and, in a manner which they would never do in "real life".  The persona of "sweepyface" is a very good example. 

I am certainly not condoning what she did over the months and years, but on reflection I can understand it.  I usually read my posts before pressing send, and confess that I have deleted or modified quite a few. 

[Mr Gray]

That is true, Alice.  And the anonymity afforded by the internet means that some people get carried away, and say things and, in a manner which they would never do in "real life".  The persona of "sweepyface" is a very good example. 

I am certainly not condoning what she did over the months and years, but on reflection I can understand it. I usually read my posts before pressing send, and confess that I have deleted or modified quite a few.

In what way can you understand it..her behaviour was despicable

[Jean-Pierre]

I don't see anything criminal there.....if someone outed me on this board do you imagine that would be a criminal offence...it wouldn't...just as Martin Brunt did not commit a criminal act

I dont think there is an offence of "conspiracy to out". 

To be serious for a moment - there is a right to privacy, but not a corresponding right to anonymity. 

If you decide to publish something, especially something detrimental, then you do expose yourself to the possibility of being identified and , outed.  If the posts come under the civil or criminal law,  then court is always a possibility.   

[Mr Gray]

I dont think there is an offence of "conspiracy to out". 

To be serious for a moment - there is a right to privacy, but not a corresponding right to anonymity. 

If you decide to publish something, especially something detrimental, then you do expose yourself to the possibility of being identified and , outed.  If the posts come under the civil or criminal law,  then court is always a possibility.

the right to privacy is not as comprehensive as you may think...for instance anyone can be photographed in a public place

[Jean-Pierre]

In what way can you understand it..her behaviour was despicable

Of course it was.  However, I can understand how some people find posting addictive.  And the ability to post whatever you like, with no comeback from the "victim" and plaudits from other onliners, may make some feel invincible.   

 

[Alfred R Jones]

If you were aware of someone who spent all day, every day tweeting the kind of deranged messages I've highlighted above about you would you just turn a blind eye?  How would you feel reading those knowing that the person tweeting them knows where you  live?  Is it morally wrong to report tweeting histories like the one above to the police, or do you think it is the sensible, correct thing to do?  What if these tweets weren't directed to you but to a vulnerable person in your community or to someone who is the victim of a crime or bereaved?  Should you ignore them or report them?

[Eleanor]

Good Post, Alfred.  Heart felt.

[Brietta]

I've not seen that one ... they certainly have a thing about waterboarding ... but I have seen many, many other disgusting examples all with the #McCann.
No sane person would disagree that it is way beyond time this was stopped.

[Alfred R Jones]

I have more questions: how would you feel if you discovered that the tweets shown above were written by your sister, your wife, your daughter? Proud?  Disturbed?  Ashamed?  Delighted?  Remember these tweets were written by a prominent "sceptic", a woman pretending to be a man pretending to be a pillow case.  Should the media and the police ignore this sort of thing now in case exposure leads this deranged woman down the same route as Sweepyface?

[slartibartfast]

If you were aware of someone who spent all day, every day tweeting the kind of deranged messages I've highlighted above about you would you just turn a blind eye?  How would you feel reading those knowing that the person tweeting them knows where you  live?  Is it morally wrong to report tweeting histories like the one above to the police, or do you think it is the sensible, correct thing to do?  What if these tweets weren't directed to you but to a vulnerable person in your community or to someone who is the victim of a crime or bereaved?  Should you ignore them or report them?

Just to get some perspective, there are thousands of people in this country that are in dispute with neighbours. They definitely know where they live and the unpleasantness is often face to face and cannot be walked away from. The police find it very difficult to take action in most of these cases.

[Mr Gray]

Just to get some perspective, there are thousands of people in this country that are in dispute with neighbours. They definitely know where they live and the unpleasantness is often face to face and cannot be walked away from. The police find it very difficult to take action in most of these cases.

I think the problem in that case is evidence whereas the posters supply concrete evidence of their actions

[stephen25000]

I have more questions: how would you feel if you discovered that the tweets shown above were written by your sister, your wife, your daughter? Proud?  Disturbed?  Ashamed?  Delighted?  Remember these tweets were written by a prominent "sceptic", a woman pretending to be a man pretending to be a pillow case.  Should the media and the police ignore this sort of thing now in case exposure leads this deranged woman down the same route as Sweepyface?

The woman who you refer to as sweepyface was not been investigated by the police, but you know that.

You would also know if you had taken time to read, that I any many other people have condemned her activities.

What I have failed to see is any attempt from you whatsoever to condemn the people who are mccann supporters, clearly trolls, and, who have threatened and sent vile posts/tweets to others.

Now I have condemned those on both sides who have carried out these kind of activities.

HAVE YOU ?

[slartibartfast]

I think the problem in that case is evidence whereas the posters supply concrete evidence of their actions

Sorry, can you expand, I am not sure what you mean?