The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Man Becomes First Internet Troll to be Jailed

A man who wrote hurtful messages on social networking sites and specifically targeted the families and memorial pages of deceased teenagers has been jailed for his trolling behaviour.

Sean Duffy, a 25 year-old from the UK, has been jailed for 18 weeks for his actions, making him the first person to face time in prison for his offensive words online.

Duffy sent a string of messages directly to some of the teenagers’ families, wrote hurtful messages on memorial pages their friends had set up and also created his own YouTube and Facebook accounts in an attempt to mock their tragic deaths.

The court ruled that once Duffy is released after his 18 week sentence he will not able to access any kind of social networking site, including Facebook, Twitter, Myspace and Bebo ever again. It’s not yet been made clear how this ban will be enforced, but it’ll be interesting to see whether the social networking platforms themselves will be asked to help and what their response will be. Only last month did we discuss the Home Office’s decision to NOT restrict specific individuals from online networks in the future, and even though this is a different case, it’s still an interesting development given the public uproar over the prospect of a ban a few weeks ago.

As this is the first case of its kind, it raises some interesting questions about the correct punishment for online trolls. Granted there are those who see Duffy’s case as being particularly harsh, especially the fact he’s banned from social networks for what seems to be the rest of his life. However, far too many people seem to get away with writing all kinds of hurtful, abusive things online because they feel they have complete anonymity, but now Duffy’s sentence shows that won’t always be the case.

cvillehog wrote:Don't go online if you can't do the time?

http://thefutureisentertaining.com/man- ... ll-jailed/

Man Becomes First Internet Troll to be Jailed

A man who wrote hurtful messages on social networking sites and specifically targeted the families and memorial pages of deceased teenagers has been jailed for his trolling behaviour.

Sean Duffy, a 25 year-old from the UK, has been jailed for 18 weeks for his actions, making him the first person to face time in prison for his offensive words online.

Duffy sent a string of messages directly to some of the teenagers’ families, wrote hurtful messages on memorial pages their friends had set up and also created his own YouTube and Facebook accounts in an attempt to mock their tragic deaths.

The court ruled that once Duffy is released after his 18 week sentence he will not able to access any kind of social networking site, including Facebook, Twitter, Myspace and Bebo ever again. It’s not yet been made clear how this ban will be enforced, but it’ll be interesting to see whether the social networking platforms themselves will be asked to help and what their response will be. Only last month did we discuss the Home Office’s decision to NOT restrict specific individuals from online networks in the future, and even though this is a different case, it’s still an interesting development given the public uproar over the prospect of a ban a few weeks ago.

As this is the first case of its kind, it raises some interesting questions about the correct punishment for online trolls. Granted there are those who see Duffy’s case as being particularly harsh, especially the fact he’s banned from social networks for what seems to be the rest of his life. However, far too many people seem to get away with writing all kinds of hurtful, abusive things online because they feel they have complete anonymity, but now Duffy’s sentence shows that won’t always be the case.

Cappster wrote:at first I thought this thread was aimed at RR56 haha

Deadskins wrote:Does this mean we can be tried in England for giving UKSkinsFan the business in smack?

KazooSkinsFan wrote:No, it means he can be tried for giving us the business in smack. I'm hiring a barrister...

BigRedskinDaddy wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:No, it means he can be tried for giving us the business in smack. I'm hiring a barrister...

A barrister? Why would you need that thing that keeps you from falling down the stairs?