This is not irrelevant because pointing out that this would be unacceptable in a country considered to have some of the greatest levels of Freedom of Speech suggests that this would be unacceptable in a country with lesser levels of freedom of speech. I'm not going to pretend I know enough about Australian law to argue this topic natively, so I'm using comparisons.
It is irrelevant to discuss who has the most freedom of speech, however. =/
That doesn't make any sense. You just said yourself that Australia has less freedom of speech, and if that's the law of their land then that's it. The law doesn't change because you liken it to something else. Comparisons are meaningless in situations where things are black and white. The law is one of those areas.
If she wanted to break the laws of her country perhaps she should have gone to America to do it, where she would have gotten away with it.
Exactly my point, so why compare Australia to America? All that matters is that an Australian woman, broke the Australian law and was justly punished for her crime. We don't need to know any more than that... unless she could be proven innocent....which is unlikely.
This thread wasn't started to put the women's guilt or innoncence on trail; that's what a court of law is for. This thread is to discuss whether or not you, in your opinion, believe that her actions should be protected under freedom of speech and if Australia can rightfully claim that it people enjoy freedom of speech.
I wasn't actually suggesting she was innocent, I was making a joke.
Of course Australia can claim freedom of speech. It can't however, claim absolute freedom of speech, but then no country truly can. If I was to run around an airport telling people I was a suicide bomber I'd get arrested even in America.
Perhaps Australia has less freedom of speech than the U.S.A. but so what? Not all countries have to conform to the standards of the U.S.
This thread wasn't started to put the women's guilt or innoncence on trail; that's what a court of law is for. This thread is to discuss whether or not you, in your opinion, believe that her actions should be protected under freedom of speech and if Australia can rightfully claim that it people enjoy freedom of speech.
All i have to say,
Venezuela.
Again, had this happened in America, this would be a Civil, not a criminal issue, if it were tried in a court of law.
For example, Some magazine publishes a false story about a celebrity, spewing lies, made up stories, etc. the most that celebrity could do, in terms of legal action, is to bring a civil suit to a US. district court, where they could press libel, slander, defamation charges, and take a big chunk of the magazine publishers money as the financial settlement of the case. The magazine publisher's staff, etc, cannot, however, be sent to jail.
Back on topic, freedom of speech has limitations, but what exactly those limitations are, will always be up for discussion. Everybody is going to have a different opinion. Im sure aside from this incident, most Australians enjoy freedom of speech.
...This reminds me of certain actions performed by the Westboro Baptist Church, who I'd just as soon defend as this lady who trolls the victims of a death.
Also, people shouldn't troll, no matter what the circumstance is.
Why in God's name would defend the Westboro Baptist Church nutjobs? I don't even think God likes them.
Also, I completely disagree with Went's first post. If that was the case then everyone who made fun of dead celebrities should be locked up? Defamatory speech =/= mockery. Defamatory speech (as far as I know) is ruining someones good name after death. Accusing them of doing illegal, taboo, or otherwise unlikeable acts when they are not around to defend themselves.
Just one last thing, in no way do I condone or promote this woman's behavior, but I do think that the punishment was a bit over the top. A fine of XXXX amount of dollars (or whatever they use in KangarooLand) would have been just fine. 3 months in prison for posting some stupid **** on a Facebook page is completely ridiculous. It was wrong and inappropriate, but it wasn't illegal.
Brilliant joke.If trolling is a crime, I think a certain yellow someone should be spending some time in jail ;)
https://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/7938759/facebook-troll-sentenced
A Queensland woman was given a three-month suspended sentenced for trolling a Facebook page dedicated to the memory of a woman who died not too long ago. The judge who sentenced her said that her action were sickening but what what's more sickening to me is the lack of freedom of speech liberties in Australia. This is just my three cents though.
Ms Cook used a fake name to post offensive pictures, including a headless corpse and **********, onto the page
She also warned other online trolls that the "heavy hand of the law will come down on you" if inappropriate material is posted on social networking sites
Ms Cook's lawyer, Michael Connolly, claimed that she was bullied as a child and suffered mental health problems.
Mr Connolly said she used the internet "as a way of venting her frustrations".
That... was the point ._.;
Well, uh, quite honestly you don't know what defamatory speech is. I mean your definition is literally wrong. Sorry >.> Mockery = Defamatory speech, I'm afraid. Mockery will not necessarily get you in trouble, but it is in fact defamatory.
If it's not jail, it's an institution, because she needs serious help before she's going to be ready for society. Money will not solve her problems. Money will not stop her from harming other people. Money is not the answer.
What she did was extreme, so she got an extreme punishment. Where's the problem? 3 months isn't even that long, compared to most crimes.
That's not a comparable issue. A simple lie is not going to get you hit nearly as hard as what this troll did, which was blatant harassment, defamation, and inciting of illegal acivity with intent of causing grievous emotional trauma. (See: Making people want to hunt them down and shoot them. 8D) ...Among other things, no doubt.
Why should she be allowed to not be in jail? So she can continue to do these things and violate other people's rights and cause harm? There comes a point where you have to say "Heck no, money is not going to solve anything." and you throw an idiot in jail to keep people safe. This is an instance of that point.
The limitations themselves are actually not up for discussion. How they apply to different situations, however, is.
So are you suggesting we incarcerate or institutionalize every internet troll out there?
Im sorry but murderers, Pedophiles/rapists, drug dealers, etc, are the ones that belong in Jail. They are criminals, and deserve it. This lady is obviously just an evil wench.
Well, no... I wouldn't say trolling is automatically worth jailtime or being put in a mental institution, just like I wouldn't say all fights should put the fighters in jail. It's all very situational.
But for this particular situation? Yeah I'd say she went way too far.
For the record, the Westboro Baptist Church was sued many, many times for their actions.
Our feelings or mental health are by the dime now? People can do whatever they want to us mentally for a handful of cash? Do you honestly think that's how it works?
How would you like it if your family died and "evil wenches" started hanging posters of graphically dead people on the grave while singing horrible things about each and every one of them? Oh and then they go and laugh about it in front of you when you say anything to them. I'm sure a pocketful of money will buy your happiness back! Every. Single. Time. >=L
Well, no... I wouldn't say trolling is automatically worth jailtime or being put in a mental institution, just like I wouldn't say all fights should put the fighters in jail. It's all very situational.
But for this particular situation? Yeah I'd say she went way too far.
For the record, the Westboro Baptist Church was sued many, many times for their actions.
Our feelings or mental health are by the dime now? People can do whatever they want to us mentally for a handful of cash? Do you honestly think that's how it works?
How would you like it if your family died and "evil wenches" started hanging posters of graphically dead people on the grave while singing horrible things about each and every one of them? Oh and then they go and laugh about it in front of you when you say anything to them. I'm sure a pocketful of money will buy your happiness back! Every. Single. Time. >=L
Also, how would putting the lady in prison make the victim feel better? That does nothing to benefit the victim. At least some money benefits the victim in a way. Now if the woman had made threats to harm the deceased person's family, then that would obviously be a crime, even in America.