The 'wtf is wrong with these people?' thread.

[DanaC]

Also - much of that reporting has been shown to be libellous and deliberately so; primarily from the Murdoch press. The latest was the Sunday Times, which ran front page stories almost a year ago claiming that the McCanns had deliberately obstructed the Portugese police. They used misleading tactics, misquoted people, and then when they did print a retraction and apology it was hidden away on a insidepage, twomonths after they'd broken the story. They've just had to pay out £50k for that one.

There's always a question mark over parents. But it seems that most of the evidence now points to someone having taken the kid and the Portugese police having acted with incompetence.

And if the dickheads trolling this family were just concerned with justice and really thought the parents were guilty - wtf did they direct some of that trolling and bile towards the two young children?

[glatt]

What does it mean to "direct a comment towards someone?"

Are they calling them up in the middle of the night? Sending them letters and notes? Sending them emails? Or are they just making comments in their own FB status updates or in tweets?

I saw a lot of media coverage around the OJ Simpson trial. I'm convinced OJ Simpson is a murderer, base entirely on that media coverage, even though he was found not guilty in a court of law. When I say that OJ is a murderer, here on this public forum, am I also a dickhead troll unfairly directing comments at OJ?

Perhaps if those parents don't want to see nasty comments about themselves, they shouldn't do vanity hashtag searches for themselves on twitter. There was plenty of negative press about them, and it's understandable that a number of people view them unfavorably now and talk about it on the internet.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by glatt

What does it mean to "direct a comment towards someone?"

Are they calling them up in the middle of the night? Sending them letters and notes? Sending them emails? Or are they just making comments in their own FB status updates or in tweets?

I saw a lot of media coverage around the OJ Simpson trial. I'm convinced OJ Simpson is a murderer, base entirely on that media coverage, even though he was found not guilty in a court of law. When I say that OJ is a murderer, here on this public forum, am I also a dickhead troll unfairly directing comments at OJ?

Perhaps if those parents don't want to see nasty comments about themselves, they shouldn't do vanity hashtag searches for themselves on twitter. There was plenty of negative press about them, and it's understandable that a number of people view them unfavorably now and talk about it on the internet.

They aren't the ones who brought the trolling to the attention of police.

Internet trolls who aim abuse, including death threats, at the family of missing girl Madeleine McCann could be prosecuted as part of a new police investigation.


The Metropolitan Police has been passed an 80-page dossier of hundreds of tweets, Facebook posts and messages on online forums accusing Kate and Gerry McCann of being involved in their daughter’s disappearance in Portugal in 2007, and telling them they should “burn in hell”.

The evidence was compiled by members of the public, appalled at the campaign of abuse aimed at the McCann’s by the largely anonymous trolls, who are convinced of the McCanns’ guilt despite no supporting evidence.


Posts charted in the dossier include suggestions that the McCanns should be tortured and killed, reports of recent sightings of the couple, and manipulated images of the couple, showing them behind bars or surrounded by piles of cash.
Other messages are directed at Madeleine’s younger siblings, nine-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

One Twitter troll, whose username is ‘Sweepyface’ and has posted dozens of anti-McCann messages using the #mccann hashtag said that she was “entitled” to attack the couple when confronted by Sky News.

Authors of the dossier are calling on prosecutors to take action against the posters under the Malicious Communications Act 2003, which bans online messages containing threats of violence or that could cause stress or alarm to their targets.
Among the messages identified in the dossier is an exchange on a message board which reads:

“These 2 should burn in hell”; “I will supply the petrol”; “I’ll supply the lighter – happily”.

In one of her tweets, “Sweepyface” called for the McCanns to suffer “for the rest of their miserable lives”.

Other trolls claimed to live near the McCanns in Leicestershire, and detail supposed sightings of the family, in the gym or out shopping.

Six Twitter accounts have been set up to abuse the McCanns, the dossier says, with eight “persistent and prolific” anti-McCann activists identified. Dozens of others are said to have participated in the abuse.

Other tactics include attempts complain about the McCanns through Freedom of Information requests, the bombardment of the BBC Crimewatch show message board and Facebook pages. Anthony Summers, the author of a recent book that argues the McCanns are innocent, has also been targeted.
The campaigner spearheading the appeal, who has asked to remain anonymous, told Sky News that they feared that trolls would one day translate their threats into actions.

They said: “We know that this is still continuing, that it's escalating at an alarming rate, and becoming bolder and a lot of what they're posting is becoming much more sinister.”

Jim Gamble, a former police officer and online security expert, said: “I think the time has come for the hard-core few in the midst of this group to be investigated.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...by-police.html

[glatt]

That's what I thought. They aren't contacting the parents.

So if I say here that OJ is a murderer and deserves to burn in Hell, am I committing a crime under the Malicious Communications Act 2003?