25 Feb 2013 21:59:09
Maybe not a conspiracy but Just seen the news about some tw***er users getting court papers served for posting cureent pictures of one of the James bugler murderers (John venables I think). Anyway I was surprised to find that it is an offence to post/share images of either of the offenders even if its not even one of them! I presume for mistaken identity for an incorrect image. Surely there must be some freedom around this? I also fin it a little concerning what precedent could be set for the amount of protection applied to perpetrators of particular crimes no matter their age at the time. Discuss.
Supasub
Its a tough but I can see one this to my mind it is the piece of in the twitter pics and would love him to get he's karma, I can see why they don't want people putting pictures claiming to be child killers in case they are wrong, the easiest way to avoid that is to avoid that in the future is to not give killers a new identity.
Agree · 2 · Disagree · 0
But those two murderers will go and make new friends and their friends won't have a clue what horrible people they are.
don't people have the right to know who a killer is?
don't people have the right to know who a killer is?
Agree · 5 · Disagree · 0
Blame your government for giving them new identities, but you can not put pictures out of people who might or might not be the person, for instance I look like a drugs warlord from liverpool, I never heard of him before my mates took the pi -- and noticed the resemblance when this gangsta had a book wrote about him, it was only when I seen the cover of the book that even I had to double take, the feller in question is in prison but what if he was a nonce and people on social network sites were putting pics out about him?, I could be in a pub and could get glassed or worse, the best thing they can do is never give nonces/child killers/rapist new identities.
Agree · 2 · Disagree · 0
Those two rats got away with murder due to imbecilic crown prosecution. They were both trialled as adults, when they were children. This basically meant that when it came to appeal etc they were able to use this and have reduction in sentence. If they had been trialled as children they would still be, well they would not be in society put it that way.
Agree · 1 · Disagree · 0
Interesting frankie, does that mean you look like Curtis warren or Stephen French? They are the only 2 Liverpool gangsters I've heard of in recent years.
Supasub
Supasub
Agree · 1 · Disagree · 0
I look like curtis warren on the book cover mate.
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
Oh dear frankie, at least I bet you don't get any "trouble".
Supasub
Supasub
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
I think there was a media ruling on posting any of their identities or pictures on any medium at the time or at the recent Venables/Thompson furore about one of their recent offences. If the people who posted pics have broken this ruling then they only have themselves to blame, no matter how much it might have been in the public good. This is probably why none of the papers have been able or willing to publish current pictures or identity info, even when they probably own the pics and know their current identities.
KPS
KPS
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0
26 Feb 2013 12:33:18
should never have got rid of the death penalty. like that should have hung.
should never have got rid of the death penalty. like that should have hung.
Agree · 2 · Disagree · 0
Supasub I try to avoid trouble lol, I might try dig out my old passport and show u guys and see what u think.
Agree · 1 · Disagree · 0
Hanging children? a bit facist imo
Agree · 0 · Disagree · 0