Ultimate Seduction wrote: » Is that true, that there was no complaints made at all? Who made the police/gubberment aware?
Maxpfizer wrote: » Same questions to you Captain Obvious.
Maxpfizer wrote: » What would be the minimum amount of offense someone would have to cause before you would say a 6 month prison sentence is justified? So just give a solid example here of something a person could say online or in public or on TV or even in a newspaper where your reaction would be "the person who made that statement should now go to jail for 6 months because of that statement".
Maxpfizer wrote: » Then maybe give us an example of a statement that would be offensive but that wouldn't be a criminal offense.
Maxpfizer wrote: So the Police saw the video first and then approached the SCoJec and prodded them to make a complaint.
FCIM wrote: Nope, it's not true. He's making up things now to try and convince us, and possibly even himself, that there's evidence to back him up.
FCIM wrote: If you're not trolling, can you outline exactly why you are asking the same question over and over again expecting a different answer to the one I've already given and used evidence to back up?
Maxpfizer wrote: » That is partially true. There were no complaints made about the video initially. Police Scotland actually approached Ephraim Borowski, who works for the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities and encouraged him to make a complaint. So the Police saw the video first and then approached the SCoJec and prodded them to make a complaint. So it's not like someone complained about the video to Police Scotland. When the video went viral someone at Police Scotland saw it and the police took it upon themselves to find someone to complain about the video.
After complaints were made about the content, police were called and he was arrested for allegedly committing a hate crime by uploading the "M8 Yer Dugs a Nazi" video in April last year.
After complaints about the content, police were called in and he was arrested for allegedly committing a hate crime by uploading the footage in April 2016.
The shocking clip gathered millions of views and complaints led to the police being called in - he was charged with committing a hate crime and posting a video which was grossly offensive. Meechan, from Scotland, has been accused by prosecutors of causing fear and alarm by allegedly posting a clip which was "anti-semitic in nature". PC Colin Duff, 31, said his investigation led him to believe Meechan was the owner of the 'Count Dankula' YouTube channel which posted the video.
After complaints were made about the content, police were called in.
conorhal wrote: » Graham Linehan is the biggest douche on twitter.
dav3 wrote: » That doesn't tally with what is being reported. I haven't found any evidence to back it up, just the usual far-right nutters trying to play the victim card. However, what I have found is...https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/12/hate-crime-trial-youtube-user-video-dog-taught-do-nazi-salute/http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/16099568.Free_speech_row_as_Scots__Nazi_dog__film_maker_found_guilty_of__being_grossly_offensive_online/https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4119658/pug-nazi-salute-hitler/https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/woman-describes-how-boyfriend-turned-11162980
[Deleted User] wrote: » Thanks max
Gravelly wrote: » Had a look at it there myself - my god, Linehan comes across as completely unhinged! I would have thought the creator of Father Ted would be able to laugh at himself - he really takes himself terribly seriously, and appears to think he is some kind of imperious sage, who's word can't be questioned. What's worse is he seems to have all these little acolytes who attack anyone who dares to ask a question of the great and wise one. There's someone who is completely and utterly the opposite of how I'd imagined them to be!
FCIM wrote: » OK, so incitement to violence is beyond the pale. What about "oh Vesuvio, lavali col fuoco" (oh Vesuvius, wash them with fire) which is regularly sung at Napoli fans. Is that beyond the pale or is it OK because the volcano can't exactly understand and react to our words? And it isn't absurd, it's a regular terrace chant. In case you try to say chanting that is absurd:
Billy86 wrote: » Graham Linehan is so mean, boo hoo.
weldoninhio wrote: » What has Italy got to do with it? Italian laws and Irish laws are not the same.
Will I Am Not wrote: » Nobody said he was mean. He’s a monumental arsehole is all.
Dread Pirate Roberts wrote: » Jesus i just had a look at his tweets. What a bully
Vladimir Poontang wrote: » One of the biggest bullies on twitter, can't wait for him to be brought down a peg or two.
Ultimate Seduction wrote: » Love how everyone who disagrees with ye is far/alt right.. I voted sinn fien in the last election..
FCIM wrote: » Far/Alt Right's favourite hobby, if you don't like the facts, ignore them... or make up new ones.
FCIM wrote: » I'm not a racist, honest... I even bought a bag of chips off a black man once :rolleyes:.
Maxpfizer wrote: » Well the story told in court was that Police Scotland approached Ephraim Borowski, who works for the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities and encouraged him to make a complaint. He was also called as a witness by the prosecution.
Billy86 wrote: » Such a big meanie bully, waaaaahhhh. I'm not mad about Linehan beyond his writing, but it's hilarious how people lose their sh*t every time he opens his mouth or Tweets.
Ulysses Gaze wrote: » So I guess it must make you pretty uncomfortable standing on the terraces in Italy with the Inter tifosi hurling racial abuse like this at opposition players then.https://www.thelocal.it/20160422/racist-inter-fans-force-partial-stadium-ban-kalidou-koulibaly-inter-milan
[Deleted User] wrote: » The majority of people are not condoning the overtly racist undertones of the joke, and have admitted that it was in poor taste. They are just saying it shouldn't be a criminal matter. That is the only topic that is being discussed.
FCIM wrote: » There you go again taking the actions of a minority and using them to form your views on an entire group :rolleyes:.
FCIM wrote: » Here we go again, picking up on comments which suit your argument and deliberately neglecting the circumstances in which those comments were made. Remind me, weren't you one of the ones arguing for context to be taken into account?
Maxpfizer wrote: » Looking at this one they guy clearly states at the start of the video that he intends to turn his girlfriends cute dog into the least cute thing he can think of. Proceeds to turn dog into a Nazi. Get prosecuted and convicted for being "grossly offensive". To me this is wrong. It's probably dangerous and it at the very least allows the UK government to have a process in place for getting rid of people who say "grossly offensive" things quickly and easily. Maybe it never comes to that and maybe this all just ends with some random guy in Scotland going to jail or getting a fine and that's that. It opens a door though. If the "grossly offensive" category is flexible enough then the government can use it to get all kinds of people. Maybe they will maybe they won't. I don't know. I don't understand how being against this suddenly turns me into a supporter of, or an apologist for, the far right. I get that the far right are also supporting the guy. A broken clock is right twice a day though, isn't it? Some people are, in my opinion, so profoundly terrified of being labelled "right wing" that they will do anything to avoid any association. Even it that means being on the wrong side of something. Even if it means supporting government policies that are overly authoritarian. I would have felt for so many years that laws that restrict freedom of expression and freedom of speech would be considered more of a right wing thing. You know? They don't want same sex marriage, they aren't pro choice, they don't even want to acknowledge the status of trans people. Not all of them, OK, but it would have been seen by me as characteristically right wing. So this guy makes an offensive joke and he's going to jail and people are scared to speak out because the far right have jumped in there first and are saying it's wrong. You wouldn't want to be seen to agree with the far right would you? If the far right nutters are saying that it's wrong that this guy was convicted because of an insane Jewish conspiracy then they are wrong. They aren't 100% wrong though. Sure they are off the mark spectacularly with conspiracy crap but it's still not right that this guy should be convicted. He's got support from the alt-right apparently so that's that. The truth doesn't matter any more lads. What's right and fair doesn't matter anymore. We just need to make sure that nobody calls us right wing. The Right have sort of hijacked the free speech discussion and turned it into one of their talking points. So The Left seem to be backing away from it because they are scared of being called alt-right. How many posters so far on this thread have tried to make it a left vs right issue with the main crux of their point being that the far right are defending this guy?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
