Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Good luck Harry The Owl

988 replies

BoreOfWhabylon · 20/11/2019 08:45

Court case today.

twitter.com/WeAreFairCop

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
tooyoungat40 · 20/11/2019 11:30

And thanks nauticant

Datun · 20/11/2019 11:30

The judge has noted that the complainant didn't even see the tweets themself. They were alerted to them by someone else. The judge is getting it.

Michelleoftheresistance · 20/11/2019 11:30

If no one is allowed to post anything on line unless it constructively contributes to a debate, the police are going to have to abandon all other duties. And presumably sit in pubs and other public places to police everyone's conversations at all times to be appropriate, polite and constructive only?

The punitive desire behind the reporting is being made plainly apparent, which is a good thing. It is not enough to remove what has been said, the sayer must be punished.

tooyoungat40 · 20/11/2019 11:30

Do we know who that might be, or is it not known public (I have no idea how these things work)

BovaryX · 20/11/2019 11:30

The test is, in plain English - "in the eye of the beholder". For all other crime or recordable incident, the test is "in the eye of a reasonable person”

Thank you Lang. That’s a very interesting distinction. It does if course raise the question what if the ‘beholder’ is an unreasonable person?

nauticant · 20/11/2019 11:29

As I understand it tooyoungat40 the "complainant" is the person who made the complaint to the Police about Harry Miller.

HavelockVetinari · 20/11/2019 11:28

Will it still be on tomorrow? If so I'll pop down there myself!

TimeLady · 20/11/2019 11:27

Glad to see the judge reads The Times. Might means he's well aware of the ins and outs of the debate already.

tooyoungat40 · 20/11/2019 11:26

Sorry to be dim, but who is the complainant?

Original poster
BoreOfWhabylon · 20/11/2019 11:25

Do we know how long this case is likely to go on for and when judgement can be expected?

OP posts:
BoneAppleTeaa · 20/11/2019 11:25

I’m trying to keep up with the twitter thread but it’s very fast paced, they’re doing a great job of relaying it!

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 20/11/2019 11:25

Thank you Lang

LangCleg · 20/11/2019 11:24

What does polemicism mean?

Polemic is strongly worded speech or writing about someone or something.

teawamutu · 20/11/2019 11:23

Important to remember the respondents also have a go and the judge will have to put awkward questions then, too...

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 20/11/2019 11:22

Counsel - agree. And it is used in the context of a debate. refers to 'open season on transgender community' Judge - this is not evidence, this is polemicism.

What does polemicism mean?

LangCleg · 20/11/2019 11:22

The test is, in plain English - "in the eye of the beholder". For all other crime or recordable incident, the test is "in the eye of a reasonable person".

(Sorry to quote myself!)

So, for example, the laws on self defence rely on what a "reasonable person" would do in any given situation. Were this "eye of the beholder" standard to apply - you'd have an automatic defence on any violent crime you committed against a person because of how you, no matter how unreasonably, perceived them.

RaymondStopThat · 20/11/2019 11:21

Just wanted to add another good luck. Desperately hoping for the right outcome.

BovaryX · 20/11/2019 11:20

Judge - Freedom means the right to be told what we do not wish to hear.

That’s a great definition. This is the core issue. Freedom of speech and thought.

BovaryX · 20/11/2019 11:18

Under that policy what's to stop anyone making a completely false report just to get back at someone they have a grudge against?

Exactly. And won’t it mean that the police will be so paralyzed investigating Twitter that they won’t be able to focus on violent crimes happening offline?

StoatofDisarray · 20/11/2019 11:18

@Whatsnewpussyhat Thank you - I sort of hoped that wasn't the case... is there a court case or group pushing to make misogyny a hate crime?

ResistSexism · 20/11/2019 11:17

Good luck Harry.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 20/11/2019 11:17

If Harry wins this it could potentially be massive, in terms of precedent.

teawamutu · 20/11/2019 11:17

Under that policy what's to stop anyone making a completely false report just to get back at someone they have a grudge against?

Square root of fuck all, so far as I can see.

FloralBunting · 20/11/2019 11:16

Judge - Freedom means the right to be told what we do not wish to hear.

Now that is an interesting phrase in context. I'm on tenterhooks.

LangCleg · 20/11/2019 11:16

No objective evidence of hate yet it’s still a crime?

Not quite. A recordable incident for hate strand monitoring purposes.

The test is, in plain English - "in the eye of the beholder". For all other crime or recordable incident, the test is "in the eye of a reasonable person".

Harry's case partly hinges on the fact that the police use this loosened standard to record on indivduals, not simply anonymised totals for statistics purposes.

Swipe left for the next trending thread