The views below are submitted by registered users of evertonfc.com and do not necessarily reflect the views of Everton Football Club. View the Blueroom acceptable usage policy.

Scandal on Twitter...
  • OldGoldenVision
    Posts: 19,512
    Just reading about a few Everton "fan" accounts on twitter that were "fake"... I cant believe how trusting people are on t'web... Genuine shock and outrage that these accounts weren't real... I tell ye if Howie isn't real I'll cry!

  • blue32years
    Posts: 16,350
    Names and pics

    Or...... You know the drill
  • OldGoldenVision
    Posts: 19,512
    @Clariceefc
    @Clarice_efc
    @mrsfellaini1878
    @evie1878

    Many an amorous young toffee was conned...
  • brett
    Posts: 665
    been told you are a solicitor, so ifany chance you can try cleari up something been having stupid argument about . I remember being taught vaguely about the difference between slander, libel and contempt of court, and as far as I can see without any new legal precedent the people who revealed the rape victim's name are criminally liable on at least two of these accounts. But from my point of view Twitter is now a part of the media and the people who run it have the same responsibility as Editors of Papers or TV and therefore should be considered liiable. I can see them saying its just a tool to be used and not their repsonsibility but when its being quoted consistently on other news sources and forming the news can they really just say that it is nothing to do with them if people directly use it to break the law in a way they couldn't without it...assume that ithe offence they being charged with is slander rather than liibel which means they are viewing Twitter as a public place rather than a published part of the media. But they refer to themselvesd as social media and I really cant see the difference between this and a news source when it is immediately available to the world
  • brett
    Posts: 665
    I realise there probably a non argument anyway but maybe it should open up debate about how free of monitoring and editorial control these sites should be
  • OldGoldenVision
    Posts: 19,512
    Firstly the law of defamation is a civil matter so there is no question of "criminal" liability for either libel (something seen) or slander (something heard).

    As for contempt of court you would have to demonstate that someone has defied the court - hard to suggest that someone who knows a person and comnents on said person in the ordinary course of things is actively defying or disobeying the court.

    So far as twitter is concerned it would argue it is an open forun for discussion in the same way as a public gathering area is. They have no more responsibility to police it than a local authority would have popping down the local boozer to hear the latest gossip.

    The comments aren't theirs and they don't endorse them.
  • brett
    Posts: 665
    can see what they would argue but feel if the law was consistently being broken in a pub or an organised public meeting then they would be held to account if they were making no attempt to prevent this. I know twitter will argue its just an open space for debate, editors of newspapers can remove themselves from responsibility for what is said by individual contributors but as far as I know if an illegal act took place and they publsihed it then they are liable.
    Wouldn't it also be fair to say that Twitter is not the same as a public meeting place as the environment there is limited and the damage of something said can be controlled with anyone repeating it still liable. But one comment on twitter makes the question of it being controlled irrelevant as it is immediately in the public domain, which was argued with the Ryan Giggs case
  • brett
    Posts: 665
    i know its nonsense to talk now about controlling forums and social networks but no other sites are being used to form opinion and news the way that Twitter does
  • CharlieCroker
    Posts: 964
    brett said:

    I remember being taught vaguely about the difference between slander, libel and contempt of court,


    Slander is calling someone a c**t.
    Libel is writing it down.
    Contempt of court is calling the judge a c**t. (See note 2.)

    Notes.
    1. A good method of libel is with the use of spray paint on the c**t's house. Optionally, you may then photograph the work and rent one or more of those advertising hoardings to display it. Alternatively, plant daffodil bulbs in the shape of the letters of the word in the c**t's garden. Aerial photography is best for this method. Aeroplanes may be rented at a reasonable cost or, even better, why not select a c**t who lives near an airport? Of course, you must be quick, as the astute victim may resort to a lawnmower at any stage. I am working on a hybrid of daffodils and Japanese knotweed, which may reduce the urgency required. The only reliable method, I have found, is to purchase a large pocket of land adjacent to the c**t's property- then you can plant what you like, with an arrow.

    2. Save this until after sentencing. It has been known to increase the severity of the penalty. Remember- you may be proud of your vindictiveness, but these are the professionals.
  • brett
    Posts: 665
    surely worth calling someone a c un t if you then get your chance to argue in court that this isn't defamation as they really are a c un t. good therapy and if they win and the court rules they aren't then you can change course and argue that there is nothing wrong with c un ts and the court is being sexist
  • brett
    Posts: 665
    I regularly text my friends to say David Cameron is a lying c un t who has colluded with the press to committ major fraud. I would never be stupid enough to write this on an open forum though
  • OldGoldenVision
    Posts: 19,512
    He'd have to prove he isnt... Or hasnt done those things... Many worms and a can involved along the way... As for the c word... Thats just opinion... Just dont add any adjectives...
  • CharlieCroker
    Posts: 964
    brett said:

    surely worth calling someone a c un t if you then get your chance to argue in court that this isn't defamation as they really are a c un t. good therapy and if they win and the court rules they aren't then you can change course and argue that there is nothing wrong with c un ts and the court is being sexist



    Unfortunately, there is no cast-iron legal definition of the word "c**t". Like everything else in law, it is shrouded in ambiguity and open to interpretation, fertile ground for liars to spin their yarns. C**ts lie, if you had not noticed. The wigs will then further complicate a simple matter by translating it into their own arcane language, that only they understand. It is how they make their money.

    Regarding your second point, this is entirely valid. However, you would have to get in quick, to set a legal precedent before any action is brought against you. A "nothing wrong with c**ts" law would pave the way for a better world, in my view. I would use a European court for this.They are more enlightened over there. In France, they just shrug their shoulders, for instance. Can you imagine a Frenchman not agreeing with the idea that there is nothing wrong with c**ts? Of course you can't.
  • brett
    Posts: 665
    bit hungover so can't even imagine a frenchman. have heard an argument from someone once that tw*t is worse than c**t as it refers to prostitutes and in way it implies that they are little more than walking sex organs. interesting historical lesson if true, but nonsense in terms of how people use it nowadays if my friends call me a tw*t then its fair comment, if someone in the street who doesn't know me calls me a tw*t then its straight to court with them, or some smart arsed comment back depending on my financial situation
  • brett
    Posts: 665

    He'd have to prove he isnt... Or hasnt done those things... Many worms and a can involved along the way... As for the c word... Thats just opinion... Just dont add any adjectives...


    -----------------



    so 'you lovely c**t' would see me in the dock
  • CharlieCroker
    Posts: 964
    brett said:

    so 'you lovely c**t' would see me in the dock


    Haha. Excellent. "You are a lovely c**t, aren't you?" is now my favourite insult. It also has the advantage of further muddying the legal waters. For instance, in a frank exchange of views with the Prime Minister, I will, in future, recommend the argument, "Mr. Cameron, are the opinions you are propagating not those of an exquisite c**t?
  • brett
    Posts: 665
    don't confuse it with 'that's a lovely c**t' which kills the mood and leads to a long hard lesson about when jokes are appropriate
  • CharlieCroker
    Posts: 964
    brett said:

    don't confuse it with 'that's a lovely c**t' which kills the mood and leads to a long hard lesson about when jokes are appropriate



    Yes- one must avoid accusations of sexism, even during sex. Unless, of course, one and one's partner(s) are of the same gender. In these situations, it is clear beyond reasonable doubt, that the phrase is being used as a fair insult. For example, if one's sweetheart were to insert one's hairbrush, completely by accident, into the wrong hole, the exclamation, "Oh, you are such a divine c**t" would probably pass without comment.
  • escla
    Posts: 2,453

    Firstly the law of defamation is a civil matter so there is no question of "criminal" liability for either libel (something seen) or slander (something heard).

    As for contempt of court you would have to demonstate that someone has defied the court - hard to suggest that someone who knows a person and comnents on said person in the ordinary course of things is actively defying or disobeying the court.

    So far as twitter is concerned it would argue it is an open forun for discussion in the same way as a public gathering area is. They have no more responsibility to police it than a local authority would have popping down the local boozer to hear the latest gossip.

    The comments aren't theirs and they don't endorse them.



    You forgot to include the final paragraph ! " I now now have pleasure In presenting my firms invoice for £67,450.00 in respect of advice given in the matter of clarification of definitions"

    32 Hrs Associate

    8 Hrs Junior Partner

    4 Hrs Senior partner

    Telephone calls, photocopying, travel.

    -----------------




  • 1ceablue
    Posts: 3,253
    escla said:



    -----------------






    Don't be silly, he can spin this out for a lot longer yet.....and the meter keeps ticking.......
  • escla
    Posts: 2,453
    Your right, I suppose that if he responds to this post it will be an additional £4,450. Plus v.a.t. !

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Poll

No poll attached to this discussion.

In this Discussion