Man gets sent to prison for being a troll.

tk_saturn

Well-Known Member
OP
Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
3,325
Trophies
0
Website
Visit site
XP
55
Country
I had to post this.

BBC News said:
Jade Goody website 'troll' from Manchester jailed

Colm Coss's activities were uncovered when he posted photos of himself to neighbours

An "internet troll" who posted obscene messages on Facebook sites set up in memory of dead people has been jailed.

Colm Coss, of Ardwick, Manchester, posted on a memorial page for Big Brother star Jade Goody and a tribute site to John Paul Massey, a Liverpool boy mauled to death by a dog.

The 36-year-old "preyed on bereaved families" for his "own pleasure", Manchester Magistrates Court heard.

He was jailed for 18 weeks for sending "malicious communications".

The posts included comments claiming he had sex with the victims' dead bodies, the court heard.

Mental health

He was charged under the Communications Act 2003, for sending malicious communications that were grossly offensive.

Unemployed Coss was only caught when he sent residents on his street photos of himself saying he was an internet "troll".

One of the residents passed the photos to police who interviewed him before he eventually admitted to posting abusive messages.

The term "troll" was described in court as someone who creates new identities on Facebook accounts and then posts numerous offensive comments to upset or provoke a reaction from others.

Chairwoman of the bench Pauline Salisbury said: "You preyed on bereaved families who were suffering trauma and anxiety.

"We know you gained pleasure and you aren't sorry for what you did."

The defence raised possible mental health issues but they were dismissed by the bench.

Source

This is the subsection of the Communications Act 2003, which is Law in the United Kingdom. It's the same Act which covers stealing a neighbours WiFi.
Communications Act 2003127 Improper use of public electronic communications network E+W+S+N.I.[*]A person is guilty of an offence if he—[*]sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or[*]causes any such message or matter to be so sent.[*]A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—[*]sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false,[*]causes such a message to be sent; or[*]persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.[*]A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.
[*]Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to anything done in the course of providing a programme service (within the meaning of the Broadcasting Act 1990 (c. 42)).

"Level 5" is £5,000.
 

basher11

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,385
Trophies
0
XP
511
Country
United States
sick bastard. he should have gotten more time in jail.
angry.gif
 

monkat

I'd like to see you TRY to ban me. (Should I try?.
Banned
Joined
May 21, 2009
Messages
2,242
Trophies
0
Age
31
Location
Virginia
Website
www.monkat.net
XP
95
Country
United States
I remember back in my day, we had this thing that the Government insured for us, in exchange for citizenship and tax dollars...

What was it, again?....Damn...twas in the first amendment, anyway.

Oh. Britain. Whatever.

Was what he did right? No! Not by any means!
Was what he did a threat to public safety? No!
Did he cause anything but (admittedly foolishly placed - silly evolution) hurt feelings? No!

...Why is this happening?
 

Verttech4

Member
Newcomer
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
8
Trophies
0
Age
30
XP
83
Country
United States
That was very...disturbing and would be the kind of people that the world DOESN'T need. Its sad how people do change and are unique but these behaviors are not expected. I would rather feel better if he was in jail longer, even tho the victims are dead, respecting the dead is also a factor. >.> I hope they haunt him
 

Pliskron

Banned!
Banned
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
1,276
Trophies
0
XP
48
Country
United States
Well you can be a troll if you know the law. It's illegal to create and hide behind a false identity. The funny thing is, if he did that under his own name at least in the US he at most would have had civil liability at most but nothing criminal. It's a good thing he was so stupid.
 

KingVamp

Haaah-hahahaha!
Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
13,073
Trophies
2
Location
Netherworld
XP
6,931
Country
United States
monkat said:
I remember back in my day, we had this thing that the Government insured for us, in exchange for citizenship and tax dollars...

What was it, again?....Damn...twas in the first amendment, anyway.

Oh. Britain. Whatever.

Was what he did right? No! Not by any means!
Was what he did a threat to public safety? No!
Did he cause anything but (admittedly foolishly placed - silly evolution) hurt feelings? No!

...Why is this happening?
This is a form of harassment, which is illegal and there the Communications Act 2003 mention in the article.

So you wouldn't care if this was done to you?
 

Demonstryde

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
373
Trophies
0
XP
48
Country
United States
1. sounds to me like facebook has an issue with him .. not any court.. anyone who seriously thinks this man should be jailed for anything said on the internet needs to go lick their finger and stick it in the power box nearest them while holding their offspring (if they were unfortunate enough to have any) because we have a thing called freedom of speech.. and artistic creation...

2. if the things said were offensive to you ,you have just as much to write back or not look at the post as he has as much right to post it..


3. i eat every aborted fetus (lock me up bitch) with a side of black market organs blendered up into a protien shake.


4. if this was offensive to you .. i dare you to try to get me anything but kicked off this site.
 

Rydian

Resident Furvert™
Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
27,880
Trophies
0
Age
35
Location
Cave Entrance, Watching Cyan Write Letters
Website
rydian.net
XP
8,930
Country
United States
monkat said:
I remember back in my day, we had this thing that the Government insured for us, in exchange for citizenship and tax dollars...

What was it, again?....Damn...twas in the first amendment, anyway.
The first amendment protects political speech, this is most certainly NOT political speech (nor is pretty much anything people cry "first amendment" for).



Before anybody makes any claim about what's illegal and what's not, and what laws say what, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD GO LOOK THEM UP AND READ THEM.

You all should know this by now with me being a regular poster here.
tongue.gif
 

Pliskron

Banned!
Banned
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
1,276
Trophies
0
XP
48
Country
United States
Trashed Post said:
*snip

1. it's not illegal for me to say all kinds of defamatory things about you however I could be held civilly liable.

2. It's completely illegal as it should be for me to pretend to be you for the purpose of damaging your reputation.

3. Freedom of speech protects offensive speech but assuming another identity is a criminal act as it should be.

4. So have fun eating aborted fetus but just make sure not to hide behind a phony identity while you carry out your grim meal.

Rydian said:
QUOTE(monkat @ Oct 30 2010, 07:41 PM) I remember back in my day, we had this thing that the Government insured for us, in exchange for citizenship and tax dollars...

What was it, again?....Damn...twas in the first amendment, anyway.
The first amendment protects political speech, this is most certainly NOT political speech (nor is pretty much anything people cry "first amendment" for).



Before anybody makes any claim about what's illegal and what's not, and what laws say what, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD GO LOOK THEM UP AND READ THEM.

You all should know this by now with me being a regular poster here.
tongue.gif
The supreme court has ruled art, parody, and even pornography are covered by the first amendment. Rent the people vs Larry Flint. The first amendment and case law cover all speech except in the most extraordinary circumstances. Even flag burning was ruled protected speech by the high court. Speech that was meant to intimidate other and infringe on their civil rights is not protected. The cross burning case comes to mind.
 

Rydian

Resident Furvert™
Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
27,880
Trophies
0
Age
35
Location
Cave Entrance, Watching Cyan Write Letters
Website
rydian.net
XP
8,930
Country
United States
Pliskron said:
The supreme court has ruled art, parody, and even pornography are covered by the first amendment.
Parody's when it comes to freedom of speech versus copyright law (not the case here), and as for pornography and violence ("art" could be any category), those come with enforced ratings and warnings beforehand.


EDIT: Damn typo.
 

You may also like...

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    BlazeMasterBM @ BlazeMasterBM: their videos are annoying and they'll sell you an overpriced console +1