Nil , 1 is basic English - which I understand is the medium of this board. Please consult a dictionary.
2. related to a point currently debated on the groan thread - Peg A uses emotive language in her reply to my post above - certainly misplaced - or at the very least misplaced without explanation.

A photograph of a member of this forum was recently attached to a fence and nobody saw fit to deface it.

1. OK post a poll and let the board decide.

2. Yes and hence the discussion over whether or not the decision of the courts itself IS reasonable - if it indeed IS reasonable then as I have made mention before then what of the non custodial sentences imposed on others who have caused physical harm to others ?

3. If "everyone" = "you" then I begin to understand your point - I guess myself and several others do not form part of your "everyone" - thanks for that.

I chose a very poor example to illustrate my point, so I've deleted the post.

Right , like your misplaced assumptions of the boards we frequent, right?

IANAL, but I would assume he can appeal the sentence. I did think 18 months imprisonment was the maximum a magistrate could sentence, but Wikipedia implies that it's 6 months (or maybe 12 for multiple offences), so I don't know what happened here.

Actually DB, yes I would. Thankfully we were able to do exactly that in Basel and the memorial was respectfully left intact and undefaced.

Regarding whether the bloke in question in this case should go to jail or not, well I don't really know. I can see that this is going to set a precedent for these kinds of cases but is that necessarily wrong? However, saying that, I don't want the internet to become so heavily policed that open and frank discussions can't be held for fear of some criminal sentence. What one person deems as offensive, others may not....as we have seen many times on EF (and not only between valued members and trolls but also between valued members).

One other point, take the people that were jailed for inciting riots in London. These cases weren't so far different were they apart from the context being to cause chaos rather than personal attacks? It was still using social networking sites to cause malicious damage, public nuisance etc... Yet we all didn't say that it was wrong when they got banged up....

Do you know what an "assumption" is ?
If you do you'd know the daftness of your post.
Out of my assumption that you are not a native speaker of either English or Latin I shall refrain from groaning at the above.

If he was subject to an order to stop, after the last hearing, he could be in contempt of court for the second offence, and the penalties for contempt are pretty much open ended. If a restraining order was in place then 18 months is an accepted sentencing guideline.

Disobeying restraint order

R v Adewunmi [2008] 2 Cr.App.R.(S.) 52
The appellant admitted contempt of court by breaking the terms of a restraint order, restraining him from dealing or diminishing the value of his assets up to the value of £1 million and ordering him to arrange for the repatriation of funds in bank accounts abroad. He failed to repatriate the funds and transferred assets from the United States to Cyprus. The Court observed that ordinarily there are two elements underpinning a committal for contempt in such circumstances: first, a punitive element to punish the deliberate breaches of the court order; and secondly, a coercive element in order to require the contemnor to do what he is obliged to do under an existing order. The Court expressed surprise that some sentences passed for breaches of restraining orders in broadly comparable circumstances, culled from unreported Crown Court decisions, had been as low as only a few weeks. Sentence of 18 months' imprisonment consecutive to sentence for the main offence reduced to 12 months.

so maybe that could be the reason he got jailed? You guys have made me curios and now I HAVE TO do some research on Asperger's

Ohhhh,
I Am Not A Lawyer

Got it. Cheers.

Just checked the actual court report and the sentence was 126 days.

It'd be interesting to see where BBC got 18 months from.


*Plus banned from social network sites for 5 years and ordered to inform police if he buys a phone with internet access.

LOL I thought it made a funny abbreviation

Maybe I read wrong or am not understanding things today. I thought a (very) large part of the discussion had to do with the fact that Mr. Duffy has Aspergers and so should not be treated severely for his actions as he is unaware (and never will be) what it means to hurt someone's feelings.

This is what I mean by "everyone" (and why I used quotes, because it is obvious to me that not every single person would feel exactly the same)... "everyone" seems to agree that the behavior is deserving of repercussions. NOT "everyone" agrees about how severe the punishment should be.

__________________
The Joys of Opticianry

I wasn't sure at first. Thought it might have been a Swiss version of I, Robot.

You know Parnell, you go around and put on the nose of everyone who you feel have been rude to you but what I see is you not being nice either and being actually plain insulting.

You didn't call us idiots, but it is quite the same...

Which?

''i, anal'' ?

Thanks for the translation mate. I hate some of these abbreviations.....great way to make a girl feel like a dumbass!

Or in other words: TFTTM. IHSOTA....GWTMAGFLAD.

Doh!

BBC says 18 weeks. Dumbass!

I never noticwed that before