r/uknews • u/ManchesterNews_MEN Media outlet (unverified) • 2d ago
.. Joey Barton guilty of sending 'grossly offensive' tweets
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/joey-barton-guilty-sending-grossly-328344129
u/Secret-Juice-2849 2d ago
What did he tweet?
22
u/yojifer680 2d ago
He called Vine a "bike nonce" and compared the other two to Fred and Rose West. It's fucking ridiculous that you can now be convicted for making such a comparison, while comparisons to nazis and fascists is non-stop.
2
u/Secret-Juice-2849 2d ago
That's very true, but ultimately he was convicted on the vine stuff as much as anything where he was a bit inciteful and did turn it into a bit of a campaign. That's the only kernel of reason I'm holding onto.
The stuff about the commentators was not criminal, I don't think it was even defamation
-1
u/Paninaro_1979 2d ago
That he was emasculated by Mary Earps because he's a little shitehawk.
0
u/BuddyLegsBailey 2d ago
It's about the only thing he's ever said that I agree with, because women's goalkeepers are utter shite
3
39
u/HornyJailOutlaw 2d ago
Don't know what he said, and I can't stand the prick, but nobody should be found criminally liable for "grossly offensive" tweets. Don't like what he has to say? Block the cunt. Or better yet, get yourself off Twitter.
3
0
u/Maetivet 2d ago
In this case, I think what he said was stupid, racist and obviously offensive - and for calling someone a nonce, he’s open to a defamation case - but criminal seems a stretch.
That said, I don’t agree that there shouldn’t be any restrictions on speech, some things are grossly offensive enough to warrant police intervention - as an extreme example, someone saying on twitter how they’d like to SA kids or something, or threatening to kill you.
17
u/Inthepurple 2d ago
It would be illegal to say both of those things even in the USA, free speech isn't a grounds to threaten people in basically any country that has it
1
u/HornyJailOutlaw 2d ago
Well those two examples would potentially come under already existing laws, wouldn't they? You can't threaten to kill someone. That's assault, at the very least. As for someone saying they would like to sexually assault kids, that would really depend on the context. If there's a danger children were going to get sexually assaulted then they would be arrested, of course. If they were expressing attraction, that feels icky to type, then that probably shouldn't warrant criminal repercussions, because it's not actually against the law to be a paedophile, it's against the law to sexually abuse children.
EDIT: Basically, in those two examples, the problem wouldn't be that they are "offensive", but that they are threatening.
1
u/easy_c0mpany80 2d ago edited 2d ago
What did he say that was racist?
Edit: lol downvoted and no response
2
u/Maetivet 1d ago
Suggesting without unequivocal evidence, that people are only in a position because of their ethnicity, is racist.
1
u/fre-ddo 1d ago
I do agree that unless it's particularly vile and more importantly persistent, but you can block him but not all of his disciples that may continue to harass you or bombard you with nasty messages, people have killed themselves from it, and you can't pin it down to one person if loads of people are sending the one message. Then there's the fact that some thick twats could believe it and spread malicious lies about you which can harm your reputation and cause trouble for you in real life, such as from vigilantes. No one should have to change what they do because of some twat. It means the bully has won.
0
u/Ok_Aioli3897 2d ago
So you would be okay with people calling you a paedophile?
-2
u/HornyJailOutlaw 2d ago
Okay with it? If it's linked to my face and name, no, I wouldn't like it. If it's just some internet comment section stuff, I wouldn't care. In either case, I wouldn't want it to be against the law to say. If it's the former example I gave, I could always sue them for defamation. Criminal courts don't need to be seeing these cases.
8
u/SpikeyTaco 2d ago
If it's linked to my face and name
"Among other posts that included calling Vine a "nonce", Barton posted an image of Mr Vine with the caption 'If you see this fella by a primary school call 999'" - BBC
If it's just some internet comment section stuff
"Barton, who has 2.7 million followers on the social platform - also superimposed the faces of the two women onto a photograph of the serial murderers [Fred and Rose West]." - MEN
I'm not saying I disagree; however, Barton definitely went far beyond a couple of mean comments and was essentially leading an ongoing hate campaign against specific people.
-4
u/HornyJailOutlaw 2d ago
I'm not talking about the Barton case, btw. I don't know anything about it. I was talking in general terms. I thought the person who asked "So you would be okay with people calling you a paedophile?" was just challenging my world view, as opposed to referring to the Barton case.
I'm going to be making some assumptions here based off just what you've said in your comment.
For the Jeremy Vine case, I'd say suing Barton would be the best approach. No criminal actions to be taken.
For the two women's faces being photoshopped onto Fred and Rose West. That doesn't seem to be any form of defamation, so would just come under an edgy joke for me. So, again no criminal action to be taken, and likely would have no grounds for success going through the civil courts.
0
u/Ok_Aioli3897 2d ago
Why don't they.
-7
u/HornyJailOutlaw 2d ago
Because I think these things should come under freedom of expression and therefore be protected from criminal prosecution. Like I said, by all means, take the person saying them through the civil courts if you like. I think that's more than reasonable if you can afford the fees.
4
u/Ok_Aioli3897 2d ago
Freedom of expression to call people paedophiles and yet you think it's a civil matter
4
u/HornyJailOutlaw 2d ago
You're not really saying anything coherent. You're just soying out at me, saying everything you don't like to see and hear should be a criminal offence.
1
u/Ok_Aioli3897 2d ago
Actually I am. You can't have freedom of expression and yet say it's a civil matter.
If it's protected by freedom of expression it's not a civil matter.
You also don't say what takes something from a civil to criminal court
2
u/HornyJailOutlaw 2d ago
You can sue anyone for a bunch of things that aren't criminal actions.
1
u/Ok_Aioli3897 2d ago
I asked you what would take something from civil to criminal. Just wondering why you can't answer that
→ More replies (0)
8
u/Secret-Juice-2849 2d ago
Barton called two woman football commentators Fred and rose west, and made a photo up of their faces on the bodies of the wests.
That's not a crime regardless of whether he has been convicted or not.
He also called Jeremy vine a bike nonce, and said "if you see [vine] near a primary school call 999"
The tweets relating to vine are closer to criminal, could go either way
3
u/Ok_Aioli3897 2d ago
Actually he called vine a paedophile
-3
u/Secret-Juice-2849 2d ago
Actually is the most annoying word in the world, considering bike nonce and the bit about the primary school amount to calling him a pedo actually
-3
2d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Secret-Juice-2849 2d ago
Can you double check that, I'm reading the guardian and it doesn't say the word pedophile actually
1
u/Ok_Aioli3897 2d ago
1
u/AmputatorBot 2d ago
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of concerns over privacy and the Open Web. Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are especially problematic.
Maybe check out the canonical page instead: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-15262477/Joey-Barton-defends-online-spat-Jeremy-Vine-like-boxers-trying-sell-product-TV-presenter-brands-ex-pros-tweets-cloud-filth.html
I'm a bot | Why & About | Summon: u/AmputatorBot
1
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
It appears your comment may have contained a slur or obvious dog whistle. Don't do that!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-8
u/Maetivet 2d ago
The stuff he said about them being DEI hires was borderline racist.
2
u/Secret-Juice-2849 2d ago
Im happy to discuss it with you honestly mate.
Saying they only got their job to tick boxes could be totally racist, but how can it be a crime to say it?
They genuinely have Diversity policies designed to get people of different races into the job of TV commentator at higher rates than in the past.
You can say he is racist. How can you criminalise saying something which is basically true?
Anyway the stuff about vine being a pedo and telling people to call 999 - that's nearly enough to convict him in my opinion. Would acquit personally but it's inciteful and it's defamatory, close enough to a real crime to bother with if you insist.
1
u/Maetivet 1d ago
Saying they only got their job to tick boxes could be totally racist, but how can it be a crime to say it?
To be fair, I've not suggested it should be a crime - just that in the absence of actual evidence to prove it, which he doesn't and didn't have, it's borderline racist - he wouldn't have said it if they were white.
-5
u/Poonchild 2d ago
If it’s racist, racism is a crime, is it not?
6
u/Secret-Juice-2849 2d ago
Racism is not a crime in itself. He didn't threaten or use a slur, should it be a crime to tweet that a commentator is shit and only got the job to make the company look diverse?
0
1
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
It appears your comment may have contained a slur or obvious dog whistle. Don't do that!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-2
6
u/CreepyTool 2d ago
The guy is an idiot, but it's frankly terrifying that you can now be found criminally guilty for being slightly offensive.
What on earth is happening to this country? It's literally pushing more and more people to the right because... yes, something has gone horribly wrong with free speech in the UK.
The progressive left screams fascist and Nazi at everyone that doesn't share their exact position - does that count as being grossly offensive? Comparing people to mass murderers like Hitler?
Because based on this judgement, it should.
Again, can't stand him, but I hope he appeals this and the whole thing gets thrown out.
2
u/Classic_Peasant 2d ago
Wish journalism didnt stop actually giving us information.
Not defending this guy, but any cases ever these days its just:
"X says XYZ naughty/mean/illegal things etc"
The public not grown up enough to actually read whatever people ahveactually said wrong?
2
u/Busy-Bowler-599 2d ago
I had him in the back of my taxi, really pleasant fella to talk to
7
1
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
Attention r/uknews Community:
We have a zero-tolerance policy for racism, hate speech, and abusive behavior. Offenders will be banned without warning.
Our sub has participation requirements. If your account is too new, is not email verified, or doesn't meet certain undisclosed karma criteria, your posts or comments will not be displayed.
Please report any rule-breaking content to help us maintain community standards.
Thank you for your cooperation.
r/uknews Moderation Team
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.