Troll sentenced to 18 weeks in prison.

MungBean · 13-09-2011 1:19pm #1

They finally got one.

Sean Duffy was sentenced to 18 weeks in prison.
The court heard he had been "trolling" - or posting malicious messages onto memorial sites set up for people who have recently died.
The case concentrated on the case of Natasha MacBryde, 15, who committed suicide by throwing herself under a train.
A number of messages were posted by Duffy on a site set up by her brother.
The 25-year-old set up anonymous profile called "Tasha the Tank Engine" and posted distressing and macabre videos on Youtube.

Ya would want to be one sad pathetic cnut to be at that kinda shíte.

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16068619

GavRedKing · 13-09-2011 1:21pm

Thats more cnutish then trolling in my books.

Ross_Mahon · 13-09-2011 1:22pm

He looks like a troll

MitchKoobski · 13-09-2011 1:22pm

Thats not trolling, thats just being a dick.

Mickey H · 13-09-2011 1:24pm

gavredking wrote: »

Thats more cnutish then trolling in my books.

True, it is actually worse than trolling. At least the trolls are just a pain in the hole. What this tool did is far worse.

sunflower27 · 13-09-2011 1:29pm

What was the point of that? Really? It's not because it's funny.

He's sick.

ronan45 · 13-09-2011 1:30pm

You can be jailed for this?

In any event creepy thing to be at! Idiot

LondonIrish90 · 13-09-2011 1:30pm

He's not your average internet troll. He's far worse - a deeply evil person.

I hope he gets battered about in prison.

krudler · 13-09-2011 1:32pm

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

He's not your average internet troll. He's far worse - a deeply evil person.

I hope he gets battered about in prison.

he'll get battered alright.

with dicks.

My name is URL · 13-09-2011 1:32pm

Yer man's a tool alright, but the story about the young one throwing herself under a train because she was sent a hurtful message on the internet sounds a bit dubious. The media love these stories that shine a bad light on the internet. Reading that article you'd think that all the girl's problems were caused by the internet.

RichieC · 13-09-2011 1:33pm

****ing sicko..

Kanoe · 13-09-2011 1:34pm

nice to put a face to the troll, psychopath.

Son Of A Vidic · 13-09-2011 1:36pm

Not a Troll, just a sick, friendless little kunt.

Chuck Stone · 13-09-2011 1:36pm

What a strange little man.

RichieC · 13-09-2011 1:37pm

tubby little git too calling that young girl a tank engine... must be projecting.

DrumSteve · 13-09-2011 1:37pm

was he sent to the boards prison...?

If he was sent there he will definitely be battered with dicks.

dark crystal · 13-09-2011 1:42pm

Shame those Westboro Church loons couldn't get the same sort of punishment....

The_Kew_Tour · 13-09-2011 1:45pm

It's fcukers like him that should be fed to lions.

the heartless bas*ard

Logical Fallacy · 13-09-2011 1:46pm

MitchKoobski wrote: »

Thats not trolling, thats just being a dick.

Members of Anonymous do similar ****.

howamidifferent · 13-09-2011 1:50pm

I have to say from reading that and other related articles about the theme, whatever about that cretin, the images of such a beautiful young girl with so much potential in front of her, driven to take her own life is truly shocking.

TheMilkyPirate · 13-09-2011 1:58pm

Her mother, Jane, who is separated from Natasha's father, said her daughter would print out lyrics of songs and put them on her bedroom wall.
One song, Bruno Mars' Grenade contained the line "I'd jump in front of a train for you".
In a statement, her family said: "We believe that the evocative lyrics of one of her favourite songs, Grenade by Bruno Mars, coupled with access to certain websites suggesting such actions, caused her to make such a sudden drastic and uncharacteristic decision.

:eek:

mikemac · 13-09-2011 2:00pm

Blaming song lyrics.
Makes a change from blaming video games I suppose

Of course bad parenting wasn't to blame, no no no

DonJose · 13-09-2011 2:03pm

Did you read that KeithAFC, you could be looking at a life sentence!!!

dark crystal · 13-09-2011 2:08pm

mikemac wrote: »

Blaming song lyrics.
Makes a change from blaming video games I suppose

Of course bad parenting wasn't to blame, no no no

What leads you to think that bad parenting might have been involved here?

Gummy Panda · 13-09-2011 2:11pm

mikemac wrote: »

Blaming song lyrics.
Makes a change from blaming video games I suppose

Of course bad parenting wasn't to blame, no no no

I don't think they're blaming the song. They're just saying where she got the idea for her method of suicide.

mickydoomsux · 13-09-2011 2:17pm

So we have a legally enforceable right-to-not-be-offended now.

The guy was a bit of an asshole but people need to grow thicker skin. Soon enough you literally won't be able to say anything because it'll offended someone.

goose2005 · 13-09-2011 2:21pm

Gummy Panda wrote: »

I don't think they're blaming the song. They're just saying where she got the idea for her method of suicide.

because before that, she had no idea that jumping in front of a train was dangerous?

Kanoe · 13-09-2011 2:28pm

mickydoomsux wrote: »

So we have a legally enforceable right-to-not-be-offended now.

The guy was a bit of an asshole but people need to grow thicker skin. Soon enough you literally won't be able to say anything because it'll offended someone.

I'm not sure if you're trolling but desecrating the memory of someone's loved one for pleasure suggests there's probably something very wrong with him.

Columbia · 13-09-2011 2:29pm

mickydoomsux wrote: »

So we have a legally enforceable right-to-not-be-offended now.

The guy was a bit of an asshole but people need to grow thicker skin. Soon enough you literally won't be able to say anything because it'll offended someone.

Anyone who actually believes this kind of s***e needs help. We're not talking about some politically correct bullcrap here, we're talking about a 15-year-old girl who took her own life, and the sick piece of crap that has caused emotional distress to her shattered family.

Screw your head on, and stop looking for thanks from the overzealous free-speech brigade on AH.

Biggins · 13-09-2011 2:31pm

mickydoomsux wrote: »

So we have a legally enforceable right-to-not-be-offended now.

The guy was a bit of an asshole but people need to grow thicker skin. Soon enough you literally won't be able to say anything because it'll offended someone.

Actually for the record, under the Irish law of non-fatal Offences Against The Person Act 1997, it is an offence for a person without legal excuse, by any means to harass another by persistent actions, additionally also while in communication.
Harass is defined as means to act intentionally or recklessly towards the other person in such a way as to seriously interfere with his/her peace and privacy also, or to cause alarm, harm or distress.

...And this has alone, been on the Irish state laws since 1997.
I assume England as something somewhat similar - and thats just one law relating to this matter!

I should add that this is related to non-fatal acts. Should the outcome of the above lead to graver outcomes, i.e. deaths, greater and stronger laws kick further in so see that justice be done.

Bullying and intimidation upon the person - by ANY means is still unwarranted bullying and intimidation!
...And you can be held accountable for ones actions.

drunkmonkey · 13-09-2011 2:32pm

FFS, Cyber Crime, Virtual people and virtual idiots listening to them. You shouldn't be punished for any crime that's not based in the real world.

She threw herself under a train because of what someone posted online, christ people take people on the internet way to seriously, only one thing to do, ban anyone under 18 from the internet.

MungBean · 13-09-2011 2:36pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

FFS, Cyber Crime, Virtual people and virtual idiots listening to them. You shouldn't be punished for any crime that's not based in the real world.

She threw herself under a train because of what someone posted online, christ people take people on the internet way to seriously, only one thing to do, ban anyone under 18 from the internet.

So fraud, kiddie porn, threats of murder, virus, hacking and stealing info and a multitude of other stuff shouldnt be prosecutable because its all done online ?

Things done in the virtual world influence the real world. In this case they caused untold torment to the grieving parents of a 15 year old suicide victim. Its no different than him standing outside a memorial service shouting abuse at people coming and going.

sdanseo · 13-09-2011 2:37pm

I agree that there should be freedom of speech on the web, but trolling and harassing are different beasts. Trolls need a ban, harassers need a dose of prison. It's 18 weeks - he shoudlnt get hooked on crack or bumraped in that time with any luck - but he will realise his mistake, that's for bloody sure.

gargleblaster · 13-09-2011 2:37pm

The poor girl may have had mental or emotional issues. We can't just ban sensitive people from having feelings. Wherever they're bullied, the bullying has to be addressed. Prosecuting people who take bullying behavior to such extremes as this man did is one possible way of addressing it.

Also, this.

Gone Drinking · 13-09-2011 2:39pm

Skunkle wrote: »

Its no different than him standing outside a memorial service shouting abuse at people coming and going.

Good point..

However I wonder, would he have gotten 18 weeks in prison if he was doing this outside a memorial?

The guys clearly a freak anyway, delighted he got the time he got. I'm all for taking the piss but what he was at was just vicious.

Teangalad · 13-09-2011 2:41pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

FFS, Cyber Crime, Virtual people and virtual idiots listening to them. You shouldn't be punished for any crime that's not based in the real world.

She threw herself under a train because of what someone posted online, christ people take people on the internet way to seriously, only one thing to do, ban anyone under 18 from the internet.

did you actually engage your brain before you posted this ****e??

MungBean · 13-09-2011 2:44pm

Gone Drinking wrote: »

Good point..

However I wonder, would he have gotten 18 weeks in prison if he was doing this outside a memorial?

The guys clearly a freak anyway, delighted he got the time he got. I'm all for taking the piss but what he was at was just vicious.

I didnt see the videos he posted but according to sky news they were too graphical and disgusting to show. I assume if he set up a tv outside the service with his sick videos showing he would most certainly have gotten an 18 week sentence at the least.

Gummy Panda · 13-09-2011 2:45pm

goose2005 wrote: »

Gummy Panda wrote: »

I don't think they're blaming the song. They're just saying where she got the idea for her method of suicide.

because before that, she had no idea that jumping in front of a train was dangerous?

Did I say that or are you just being stupid?

texidub · 13-09-2011 2:45pm

Awful things that he did, but I'm surprised that nobody has yet pointed out that he suffers from Asperger's Syndrome, so the story might not be as morally black and white as some would like to make it out to be.

Then again AH is pretty unforgiving and these threads are often just an excuse for people to moralise viciously about the actions of others (blind to all the ironies involved, such as, for example, posting insults on the Internet directed at a guy who just got jailed for posting insulting material on the Internet.)

Biggins · 13-09-2011 2:48pm

texidub wrote: »

Awful things that he did, but I'm surprised that nobody has yet pointed out that he suffers from Asperger's Syndrome, so the story might not be as morally black and white as some would like to make it out to be.

Then again AH is pretty unforgiving and these threads are often just an excuse for people to moralise viciously about the actions of others (blind to all the ironies involved, such as, for example, posting insults on the Internet directed at a guy who just got jailed for posting insulting material on the Internet.)

We can or should assume that his defense team put this forth as even a partial defense and that subsequently the presiding sentencing judge, allowed for this (or not), gave it consideration at least and eventually after hearing further advice and informative independent matter and assessments, decided as to the outcome that there was eventually.
Thus the sentence that he got.

gargleblaster · 13-09-2011 2:49pm

texidub wrote: »

Awful things that he did, but I'm surprised that nobody has yet pointed out that he suffers from Asperger's Syndrome, so the story might not be as morally black and white as some would like to make it out to be.

Then again AH is pretty unforgiving and these threads are often just an excuse for people to moralise viciously about the actions of others (blind to all the ironies involved, such as, for example, posting insults on the Internet directed at a guy who just got jailed for posting insulting material on the Internet.)

Yes, because calling someone nasty names on a forum post is exactly the same as making a facebook page for the express purpose of harassing someone.

Also I didn't know that being so hateful and obnoxious as this guy was could be considered just a symptom of Asperger's syndrome. I'm surprised by that.

texidub · 13-09-2011 2:51pm

Absolutely. However, while a judge's decision might be legally binding and final, I don't consider judges to be the final arbitrators of right and wrong. Never trust a man in a wig

Nevertheless, my point is that the case is not simply black and white and that a little forgiveness goes a long way.

Biggins · 13-09-2011 2:53pm

texidub wrote: »

...my point is that the case is not simply black and white and that a little forgiveness goes a long way.

...And having a possible medical condition, also does not disqualify a person from being judged either and held accountable.

MungBean · 13-09-2011 2:56pm

texidub wrote: »

Awful things that he did, but I'm surprised that nobody has yet pointed out that he suffers from Asperger's Syndrome, so the story might not be as morally black and white as some would like to make it out to be.

Then again AH is pretty unforgiving and these threads are often just an excuse for people to moralise viciously about the actions of others (blind to all the ironies involved, such as, for example, posting insults on the Internet directed at a guy who just got jailed for posting insulting material on the Internet.)

As Biggin said (I think) the sentencing judge would have taken everything into consideration when sentencing him. If the judge saw fit to hand down an 18 week sentence despite his condition then I assume that the acts were not entirely due to his condition and therefore his condition did not influence (or not entirely perhaps if he didnt have the condition the sentence would have been longer) the sentencing. This thread isnt an excuse to moralise about the actions of this guy but more to discuss the result of those actions.

seanybiker · 13-09-2011 3:00pm

He probably got a lighter sentance because of his assburgers.

languagenerd · 13-09-2011 3:06pm

That poor family. I can only imagine how angry I would be if someone posted stuff like that on a page for someone I knew.

Maybe 18 weeks is harsh, but I hope it makes other people think twice before doing something like that in future!

whatsamsn · 13-09-2011 3:18pm

languagenerd wrote: »

Maybe 18 weeks is harsh, but I hope it makes other people think twice before doing something like that in future!

I think 18 weeks isnt harsh. F*ck him. Its evil what he did. Would be funny if he got rode in prision too .. would serve him right.

hatrickpatrick · 13-09-2011 3:28pm

I agree that the guy was a dick, no question there. And I have no sympathy for him.

However, under what law was he charged? If it was harassment I'm cool with that, but I can't abide any specific restrictions on the concept of freedom of speech. It's a horrific slippery slope once you start restricting what people are allowed to write online.

Harassment would be different if he was directly harassing the people involved via email or by spamming their pages. However, if he was posting the stuff on his OWN YouTube channel, I find it hard to see how he could be prosecuted without admitting that freedom of speech no longer exists...?

GrizzlyMan · 13-09-2011 3:40pm

What a horrible f*cker!:mad:

Biggins · 13-09-2011 3:41pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

...Harassment would be different if he was directly harassing the people involved via email or by spamming their pages. However, if he was posting the stuff on his OWN YouTube channel, I find it hard to see how he could be prosecuted without admitting that freedom of speech no longer exists...?

I'm personally assessing that (from the info available) he was posting direct onto memorial sites - sites set-up by the families themselves to communicate their loss and grieve.
If he was doing this, he was entering through his own volition into a form of (abusive) communication to the family persons direct - and not just into an open public forum in what can be called the normal public domain.

poisonated · 13-09-2011 7:27pm

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/memorial-cyber-bully-sent-prison-131225378.html

what do you think about this. What he did was horrible. He is obviously a sick human being. What I don't understand, however, is this not infringing on his right of free speech. When you look at groups such as the west borough baptist church who actively do this type of thing all of the time. why are they allowed away with it?

Troll sentenced to 18 weeks in prison.

Comments