A Berkshire man has been jailed for posting abusive messages online about a schoolgirl after she committed suicide.
Sean Duffy, 25, of Reading, was handed an 18-week sentence for posts on social networking sites about Worcestershire teenager Natasha MacBryde.
He previously pleaded guilty at Reading Magistrates’ Court to sending indecent or offensive communications.
Police said Duffy also posted abuse about dead teenagers in Northumberland, Gloucestershire and Staffordshire.
Duffy, of Grovelands Road, admitted two offences of “trolling” a term used to describe the trend of anonymously seeking to provoke outrage by posting insults and abuse online.
Not saying what he did was right, but come on going to jail for saying offensive shit on the internet? That’s too much IMO
[quote]Edevus wrote:
Imagine if it was real life. You go yell stuff about a dead teenager in front of her place.
[/quote]
WBC do it…and they get off easier than this guy. Not that I condone what he did. Disgusting shit.[/quote]
Not only that, but the KKK/neo-Nazis have had rallies in public spaces. If you want to talk about via Internet vs in person why is it okay to openly display your hatred for other races in public, and not okay to troll dead teenagers on the Internet?
[quote]roybot wrote:
Well, he did specifically target sites dedicated to dead teenage girls…[/quote]
As opposed to what?
Would this not be jail time worthy if he trolled say a dead soldiers page? [/quote]
Did he troll a dead soldier’s page? No. Are we into “imaginary circumstances” time already?
He targeted several different sites dedicated to several different teenage girls with abuse intended to cause emotional distress to the parents.
If it was an isolated incident, then the sentence might’ve been extreme, but it wasn’t an isolated incident. It’s clear that he was picking his targets, so it wasn’t random trolling. What’s so hard to understand?
[quote]roybot wrote:
Well, he did specifically target sites dedicated to dead teenage girls…[/quote]
As opposed to what?
Would this not be jail time worthy if he trolled say a dead soldiers page? [/quote]
Did he troll a dead soldier’s page? No. Are we into “imaginary circumstances” time already?
He targeted several different sites dedicated to several different teenage girls with abuse intended to cause emotional distress to the parents.
If it was an isolated incident, then the sentence might’ve been extreme, but it wasn’t an isolated incident. It’s clear that he was picking his targets, so it wasn’t random trolling. What’s so hard to understand?
[/quote]
It’s not “imaginary circumstances” time whatever that means. From your last post you made it appear as though trolling teenage girls was somehow worse than trolling some other group.
If he chose to troll randomly, a mix bag of people - teenage girls, blacks, gays whatever would you consider this somehow less of a crime?
Why is random trolling less of a crime to you vs picking specific victims?
Not only that, but the KKK/neo-Nazis have had rallies in public spaces. If you want to talk about via Internet vs in person why is it okay to openly display your hatred for other races in public, and not okay to troll dead teenagers on the Internet?
[/quote]
The case in the OP is in the UK, WBC are American and you’re Canadian. Why do you expect consistency? Are you familiar with the laws of any of those countries?
[quote]Edevus wrote:
What is WBC? Too many acronyms on internet about it.
Germany allowed a neo-nazi concentration the other day. Disgusting.
[/quote]
Westboro Baptist Church. Look em up. It’ll turn your stomach. They’re so disgusting that they make even the KKK go into action against them.[/quote]
Then I won’t. These people make me sick. Actually the name is quite familiar, so I’m sure I’ve seen something from them already.
It’s not “imaginary circumstances” time whatever that means. [/quote] The guy in the article did not troll a dead soldier’s page. It’s an irrelevant imaginary scenario pulled from the inside of your own head.
I did no such thing. Where did I write that? Where did I even hint at that? I explained why the guy got jailed; at no point did I weigh his crime against any other crime. You’re doing that yet keep trying to pin it on me .
[quote]
If he chose to troll randomly, a mix bag of people - teenage girls, blacks, gays whatever would you consider this somehow less of a crime?
Why is random trolling less of a crime to you vs picking specific victims?[/quote]
Again, when and where did I say that? ^ He was jailed because he repeatedly targeted the same type of victim. If you can’t see why that would increase his chances of a jail sentence, then I really don’t know what else to say to you.
And stop trying to put words in my mouth. He got a four month jail sentence. He did what he did and they made an example of him. If you believe the punishment was extreme, then explain why and we can discuss that.