facebook rss twitter

Facebook disorder inciters get four years

by Scott Bicheno on 17 August 2011, 09:54

Tags: Facebook

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qa6wn

Add to My Vault: x

Darwinian justice

Most sensible people - as opposed to posturing politicians and frothing reactionaries - view the use of BBM and social networking to coordinate crime and civil disobedience as incidental. They were merely communication tools rather than outright enablers.

Yes, modern technology has made it easier for everyone - criminals included - to communicate and coordinate their efforts, but if you're going to try to ban social networking, you might as well have a go at emails and phone calls too.

As we explored yesterday, social networking can also be used to catch baddies too, and today sees another example of why it's probably best to let people use Facebook to arrange crimes, and thus publicly incriminate themselves.

The Beeb reports that two young Cheshire men had used Facebook to coordinate riots a week ago. One even created a special Facebook event called "Smash d[o]wn in Northwich Town", and the police were alerted to these incitements by members of the public. The two were sentenced to four years in prison, despite being previously of good character and pleading guilty.

While these two committed a clear crime, they're also guilty of bad timing and being caught at a time when the justice system wants to hand out some strong sentences pour encourager les autres. They're also guilty of being mind-bogglingly stupid. Either they didn't think they were committing a crime, or they didn't realise Facebook was public.

Either way they presented themselves as an easy reward for a legal system desperate to show it's not entirely impotent. It's starting to look like Facebook will be a useful tool for making easy cops and weeding-out the most incompetent, opportunistic part-time criminals.

 



HEXUS Forums :: 17 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Ain't karma a b*tch.
the justice system wants to hand out some strong sentences pour encourager les autres.
Pedant time - shouldn't that be "pour décourager les autres"? But hey, what do I know - my last encounter with French was in high school - which was a long, long, long time ago. ;)

One thing I'm not clear on - did these two idiots actually arrange any of the rioting or, like the equally brain dead moron locally, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-14543193), were they just trying to climb aboard a train that was already rolling?

If they were arranging, then four years seems harsh, but probably justified (as ScottB says - as an example to others so inclined). If, on the other hand, they were just sucked in to the frenzy, then the sentence is not so easy to justify - kind of like the 4 month jail for the single mother who got left a pair of stolen shorts by her flatmate while she was asleep. But that's just my opinion …
Owned. I am not sure how the rioting was supposed to help anything anyway, considering all they did was smash their own shops…
Badbonji
Owned. I am not sure how the rioting was supposed to help anything anyway, considering all they did was smash their own shops…

Well, not their own shops, but shops in their communities. No, they vandalised and stole from others who live near them.

So these two weren't apparently successful in their attempts to incite riots, but what does that matter? Whether other people went along with what they were suggesting or not doesn't change what they did.

It's a harsh punishment, but sadly it costs us, the taxpayers, yet again. I want to see all of those found guilty of wrongdoing during these riots made to work to pay off their debt to society, not lumber us with yet more bills…

Roo
At first I thought, that is a bit harsh, however the more i think about it the more i agree with the judge. These people may have thought it was a joke, and no one answered their call. The riots however are not a matter to be joked about many have lost there homes, jobs and businesses. The point was that this diverted police resources at a time they were most at need. Making it far worse than “just” being part of the crowd.

The thing about the mother with the stolen shoes is… at the least she knowingly accepted stolen goods and did not report her flat mate for thief, harbouring a criminal, at the worse she actually stole them herself and the “flat mate” thing is at attempt to get off with a lighter sentence. It a tricky call for a Judge, I am glad I don't have to make such decisions.