Mods delete and edit posts despite court rulings

Jolly Red Giant

The Mods have repeatedly deleted and edited posts relating to the Jobstown trial despite rulings by the judge that supporters of the Jobstown defendants have a democratic right to post information about the trial and the protest in Jobstown in 2014.

Last week the DPP attempted to change the bail conditions of the Jobstown defendants and impose a gagging order on the defendants and groups that support them. The judge threw out all attempts by the DPP to restrict what the defendants said in public, threw out the attempt to prevent the defendants engaging in activities in support of the Jobstown defendants and participation in support groups and threw out attempts to limit the commentary on the case.

During the R2W protest last week Paul Murphy TD spoke to the assembled crowd about the Jobstown protest and the upcoming court case - the DPP took no action. I posted factual information about the trial and it was deleted (while unfounded accusations about the defendants remained on the thread).

Yesterday #JobstownNotGuilty posted a 23 minute documentary film about the Jobstown protest and the upcoming trial. I embedded this video in a post on a thread on the Politics Cafe forum. The ruling of the judge last week allowed for the production and distribution of this video. The mods removed the video. Yet the DPP who is conducting the prosecution has not taken any action to have the distribution of the video stopped.

Once again - the mods are acting against the right to free speech and to protest, in contravention to the rulings of the judge in the case who found against the DPP's attempt to gag the defendants and their supporters and despite the fact that the DPP has taken no similar action in relation to the video.

JigglyMcJabs

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

The Mods have repeatedly deleted and edited posts relating to the Jobstown trial despite rulings by the judge that supporters of the Jobstown defendants have a democratic right to post information about the trial and the protest in Jobstown in 2014.

Last week the DPP attempted to change the bail conditions of the Jobstown defendants and impose a gagging order on the defendants and groups that support them. The judge threw out all attempts by the DPP to restrict what the defendants said in public, threw out the attempt to prevent the defendants engaging in activities in support of the Jobstown defendants and participation in support groups and threw out attempts to limit the commentary on the case.

During the R2W protest last week Paul Murphy TD spoke to the assembled crowd about the Jobstown protest and the upcoming court case - the DPP took no action. I posted factual information about the trial and it was deleted (while unfounded accusations about the defendants remained on the thread).

Yesterday #JobstownNotGuilty posted a 23 minute documentary film about the Jobstown protest and the upcoming trial. I embedded this video in a post on a thread on the Politics Cafe forum. The ruling of the judge last week allowed for the production and distribution of this video. The mods removed the video. Yet the DPP who is conducting the prosecution has not taken any action to have the distribution of the video stopped.

Once again - the mods are acting against the right to free speech and to protest, in contravention to the rulings of the judge in the case who found against the DPP's attempt to gag the defendants and their supporters and despite the fact that the DPP has taken no similar action in relation to the video.

Boards is not a democracy.

Stheno

Boards does not permit discussion of ongoing court cases

Taltos

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

Once again - the mods are acting against the right to free speech and to protest, in contravention to the rulings of the judge in the case who found against the DPP's attempt to gag the defendants and their supporters and despite the fact that the DPP has taken no similar action in relation to the video.

A few things.
Firstly there is no free speech on Boards. It is privately owned.
As such when you post here or create an account you post within the site's Terms of Use.

Now have a read there, we call out

We expect you to act responsibly in posting Material on Boards.ie. You agree, through use of this service, NOT to use boards.ie to:

...
post Material in respect of any matter that is currently before the courts
post Material that could be construed as scandalising the courts

So for the mods - its a black and white decision. Following the TOU as laid out they are duty bound to take the very action you are upset with.

Now there is nothing preventing you from posting these pieces elsewhere, not that I can encourage or support you doing so but as above the mods are following the correct procedures here.

hullaballoo

Just FYI, there is no right to free speech in Ireland generally. No such right exists under the constitution or any other rights-giving justiciable document.

I think you are also misunderstanding the import of the rulings in relation to what is and is not allowed to be said online and elsewhere.

Jolly Red Giant

Taltos wrote: »

A few things.
Firstly there is no free speech on Boards. It is privately owned.
As such when you post here or create an account you post within the site's Terms of Use.

Now have a read there, we call out


So for the mods - its a black and white decision. Following the TOU as laid out they are duty bound to take the very action you are upset with.

Now there is nothing preventing you from posting these pieces elsewhere, not that I can encourage or support you doing so but as above the mods are following the correct procedures here.

Just to point out one fact - the case is not currently before the courts - and won't be until 24 April.

Now the Mods can arbitrarily decide to to delete factual posts in support of the Jobstown defendants if they want - and they can decide to leave posts that contain unfounded allegations about the Jobstown defendants if they want - they shouldn't, however, hide behind forum rules that haven't been broken as the excuse for demonstrating bias.

as an aside - it is worth noting that a mod 'liked' you post - despite the fact that it wasn't relevant in this circumstance - I suppose that is an attempt to justify the decision.

Jolly Red Giant

hullaballoo wrote: »

Just FYI, there is no right to free speech in Ireland generally. No such right exists under the constitution or any other rights-giving justiciable document.

Last week the judge in the case ruled against the DPP who attempted to gag the Jobstown defendants and campaign groups in support of them - stating that they were entitled to 'free speech' in publicising their view of the events of the protest and the upcoming trial. So your hoop-jumping about 'free speech' is semantics.

hullaballoo wrote: »

I think you are also misunderstanding the import of the rulings in relation to what is and is not allowed to be said online and elsewhere.

On the contrary - I am fully aware of the 'import' of the rulings what the DPP tried to limit and how the judge ruled in the case - the rulings were quite specific and the judge threw out every limitation that the DPP attempted to impose. Since then the DPP has not made any attempt to limit discussion of the case in the media, in public or online (of course the fact that the national media are blacking reports of events in support of the Jobstown defendants (like the Assembly for Justice attended by more than 1000 people a couple of weeks ago - attended by all the main media outlets, with reports filed by the journalists in attendance, yet there was not a peep about the event in the national media - an event that the judge ruled could go ahead, that the Jobstown defendants could attend and could speak at - which they did).

Taltos

Sorry if you disagree but these are the TOU you agreed to.
Breaches can lead to lengthy bans so please take care.

Just because the court is not sitting until the 24th does not mean that sub judice does not apply. As I said we are not lawyers here so we use simple rules as a safeguard. This prevents mods having to interpret and second guess every other post from posters who may or may not be attempting to interfere with the legal proceedings of a court case (in session or shortly due to be in session).

Thread closed.
Abide by the TOU or don't your choice.