How dumb is is our judicial system?

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/...al-appeal-lost

It seems the law is going to have their hands very busy as hundreds of people are tweeting the exact same message, including some celebrities.

http://twitter.com/#!/search?q=%23IAmSpartacus

 

it was a daft thing to tweet. in this age of paranoia, you can help by not posting dross like that <-- I meant the tweeter, not you JB

they did over react though. i expected the authorities to actually look into the bloke before stomping his door down. if they did, he'd have just got a ticking off for being an ID10T.

 

This is hilarious. All those people tweeting it now. No doubt we'll get some feckless politician trying to explain the difference between the original and all these new ones.

 

couldn't agree with the sentance more. he's an idiot, as are tweeters et al. Where's the joke in what he said ?

 

I would not go near it anyway.

Les

 

Your opinion of him is fine, but why call anyone else that uses twitter an idiot?

 

You mean it wasn't a joke?

I think a lot of people have said they would like to take down/burn/bomb etc etc businesses at some point who they perceive are not providing the service paid for.

Take the threads on SN about about some big corporate that has off shored a contact centre, I bet you could look at some of the posts and there'll be someone saying it/they need to be shot/taken down/burnt/bombed? They were being serious as well?

Obviously our security forces don't look at everything posted on the net for threats. THey use much more sophisticated analysis of threats. So if they don't focus security alerts on a single angry tweet, most likely they ignored this altogether. So should the actual waste of time fine should be directed to the people who decided to take this to court?

 

There's a difference between saying "XYZ 'needs' to be shot/taken down/burnt/bombed" and "I'm going to shoot/take down/burn/bomb XYZ"

Original bloke is an idiot.

Big Brother is TRULY out there.

Mark

 

You can't really blame the judicial system, the legal frame work they have to work within is stupendously out of date and/or is not 95% relevant to todays culture surrounding technology.

 

I was always told to deny everything ... someone else could have posted it in his name. Keep schtum is always the best policy, very difficult to prove stuff without an admission.

TX.

 

Obvioulsy yes, but Chambers changed his plea from guilty to not guilty, this was after legal advice at the station.

He was actually arrested for a 1977 law (which has been superseded) which prohibits making bomb hoaxes

 

Best nowadays is to threaten an unflushed turd in an airport toilet, no mention of guns or bombs in relation to airports is a good idea even at home.

 

Depends, you could be done the same this chap has been, menacing electronic communication.

Fine is more after a Sunday lunch iirc