After
a run of judgments establishing various parameters of what is “private”,
Max Mosley is seeking punitive damages. Until now they have rarely
exceeded four figures – Campbell, for example, got just £3,500. Some
lawyers think that could change.
It could even be said the damages awarded for an invasion of privacy
should be greater than for defamation, said one. With the latter
your reputation is restored. With privacy the bringing of the action
simply exacerbates the grievance.
Another has no doubt the effect would be wide-ranging: If he won a
very large award it would have a very chilling effect on the press.
We’re already known as the libel capital of the world. We could become
the privacy one too. Either newspapers would have to start suppressing
stories or I’m going to be getting a lot of business.
Certainly the long tradition – not always noble – of reputations
splashed, trashed, and served up with a red top’s eye for the prurient
detail could ebb away if Mosley wins.
However, there would be other more disturbing implications, too, says Jo
Glanville, editor of Index on Censorship. It’s what will happen in
the future that we really need to worry about, she said. If the News of
the World loses, it will be more proof that we’ve ended up with a very
serious law without any proper debate.
Who’s to say, for example, if an influential public figure has a dubious
private life, leaving their judgment open to question, whether it’s
permissible to publish the fact?
As Glanville says: It will make it more and more difficult to report
on public figures even when their private lives are genuinely in the
public interest. If Mosley wins, the rest of us will be living with the
consequences long after the dominatrices have fled.
Whatever turns them on? Inside the minds of the
sadomasochists
The bondage community hopes Max Mosley's lawsuit will stop them being
seen as perverts on the fringe of society
This trial is a good thing, said Deborah Hyde, spokeswoman for
Backlash, which campaigns for BDSM rights.
We're finally getting the chance to talk to the media, who have
ignored us for years. In Max Mosley we've got a man who says: 'This is
who I am'. He's got expensive lawyers who can fight his case, but many
others end up being dragged through the family courts or in front of
their employers. In Mosley, we have someone who is fighting our corner.
An
art project has joined other artworks and monuments rejected by the
little-known Westminster Public Art Advisory Committee, whose work is
rarely publicised despite its power to influence the look of some of the
capital's best-known locations.
According to confidential minutes of meetings released to The
Independent on Sunday, the plan to honour Reagan by the US artist Chas
Fagan was ruled out in April after members said the work was "weak",
"lacking gravitas" and risked "cluttering" the square outside the
American embassy.
The work now joins the panel's rejected list, which includes Marc
Quinn's giant steel orchid outside Hertford House, ruled
"anachronistic".
The influential panel deals in the high numbers of public art
applications. Its members are drawn from institutions such as the Royal
Academy of Art. A negative view usually forces artists to review their
plans or kill them altogether.
Jo Darke of the Public Monuments and Sculpture Association said: I
can appreciate the view about cluttering Westminster, but there are lots
of dark corners that could be brightened up by a sculpture.
Games
company Electronic Arts has stepped into the fray over videogame ratings
in the U.K., saying that proposed changes to the current system will
result in release delays for new titles.
The proposals, initially raised by the Byron Review, recommend the BBFC
begin rating games that earn a 12+ rating from PEGI, rather than the 15+
minimum currently used. As a result, according to Eurogamer, the number
of games demanding the attention of the BBFC would increase
significantly, resulting in delays of ratings across all games.
The government's proposed changes to the existing age rating systems
will create further delays in getting hit games to the U.K., said
Electronic Arts U.K. Vice President Keith Ramsdale in an interview with
GamesIndustry. An extra and unnecessary layer of administration
beyond a single system slows the process, and that delay will get passed
on to the players themselves.
Every time you add a new standard, game developers have to guess what
the censors are looking for. If there's more than one standard in the
U.K., and across Europe, that can only equal delays in getting games to
market and into the hands of British players."
Britain's
Queen Elizabeth II has conferred a knighthood to Salman Rushdie, the
author of the blasphemous book Satanic Verses.
The ceremony to confer the knighthood was held in London's Buckingham
Palace on Wednesday, with many believing the move would trigger a wave
of protest by Muslim nations.
A spokeswoman for the queen, who asked not to be identified because of
the monarch's policy, was quoted by AP as saying that Rushdie was not
listed among those to be honored because he was a late addition to the
investiture.
The late Imam Khomeini pronounced a death sentence on Rushdie because of
blasphemy against Islam in his novel The Satanic Verses.
The conferment of knighthood to the author of a blasphemous book which
has insulted the Muslim world is widely considered as demonstration of
Britain's flagrant hostility toward Islam.
Violent
computer games are being sold to children through internet auction
sites, avvording to Trading SubStandards
Almost 90% of traders investigated by the Welsh Heads of Trading
Standards supplied violent games to youngsters.
In the investigation, six local authorities enlisted volunteers aged
between 12 and 16 who attempted to buy 18-rated video games on the
internet using postal orders.
Of the 44 purchases attempted, 38 traders sold the games to the
children.
Among the games bought by the youngsters were Manhunt, Grand Theft
Auto, Godfather and Hitman.
Traders found guilty of supplying such games to under-age customers can
be jailed for up to six months or fined.
Lee Jones, acting head of Bridgend County Borough Council Trading
Standards, said: This survey shows how easily children can gain
access to age-restricted violent video games.
A Trading Standards Institute spokesman said: Traders selling goods
over the internet have a responsibility to make sure they have methods
in place to avoid breaking the law. If traders cannot be sure the person
they are selling to is over 18 then they should not be selling.
TSI chief executive Ron Gainsford said: Parents and guardians also
have an important role to play in making sure children are not playing
unsuitable video games.
It's
2008 and sex seems to be everywhere. So who holds the line between
permissiveness and obscenity? What is obscene these days? And how do
those people entrusted to make these calls cope with the harrowing work?
I had a good belly laugh at the remarks by Inspector Shortland about his
sensitive subordinates being exposed to that horrid pornography.
Back in my misspent youth I was a member of an organization for young
business and professional men, which shall remain nameless, but if you
think of a circular item of dining room furniture, you won't be far off
the mark. I was a bit miffed when I was unable to attend the meeting one
week when the entertainment was some blue movies. How had the organizers
acquired them and ensured that the films were especially raunchy? A
member who was a copper (sergeant awaiting promotion to inspector) had
made arrangements with his pals in the Obscene Publications squad for
the loan of some juicy recently confiscated material.
London
Mayor Boris Johnson has pointed the finger at violent video games for
being a cause of knife crime in the Capital.
In a piece railing against ‘London’s knife crisis’ written for
thelondonpaper, the blunder-prone public figure writes: We must show
young people that knives are not cool, and for that we need positive
role models.
I want to counteract the damaging influences drug-addled celebrities
and violent video games and the lure of the life in the gang by
providing opportunities.
Scots
sending sexually explicit e-mails were warned last night that they could
be accused of being a sex offender.
As part of the biggest overhaul of sex offences in Scotland, a new
statutory offence of "communicating indecently" will criminalise those
who send malicious and unwanted sexually offensive e-mails and texts, as
well as other verbal and written messages.
A new bill unveiled contains proposals for a raft of other new offences,
covering areas such as indecent exposure and spiking drinks for the
purpose of having sex.
The proposals are based on recommendations in a report published last
December by the Scottish Law Commission. It had been commissioned in
2004 to examine the law on rape and other sexual offences.
Age of Consent
However, ministers have turned down a commission proposal to
decriminalise all consenting sex between youngsters aged 13 to 15.
BDSM
The new legislation rejected a proposal to decriminalise consensual
adult sexual violence. It's not everybody's cup of tea, but when both
parties are willing, where's the harm? For the government, it was the
fear that such a move might offer some form of legal escape to rapists
and those who commit domestic violence. It's a powerful argument, but a
misguided one. These are instances in which the state simply should not
meddle.
Sex tourism
Anyone from Scotland who travels abroad and has sex with someone under
the age of 16 can currently only be prosecuted on their return if the
intercourse was also illegal in the foreign country.
Indecent communication
THE bill defines the new offence of indecent communication as occurring
when a person intentionally delivers a sexual message to another person.
The offence requires that the person sends the communication to obtain
sexual gratification, or to humiliate, distress or alarm the recipient.
The communication can be a word in someone's ear, a page from a
pornographic magazine, or an e-mail or text.
Someone who sends an offensive e-mail to a group of colleagues, friends
and other people could be breaking this new law.
However, the Crown would have to prove that the purpose of sending the
e-mail had been malicious, or that the sender had done it for a sexual
"thrill".
Anyone found guilty of indecent communication faces a maximum ten-year
jail sentence.
Public indecency
THE offence of public indecency, which can include "flashing", streaking
and urinating in public, already exists. But the government explicitly
wants to criminalise anyone who intentionally exposes their genitals in
a sexual manner to another person with the intention of causing alarm or
distress, or being "reckless" as to whether alarm or distress may be
caused.
The new offence also criminalises sexual exposure in someone's home. The
aim is to make it clear such behaviour is a sex crime completely
separate to someone causing offence by, for example, sunbathing naked in
a public park. The Scottish Law Commission, which first proposed the
move, reasoned that indecent exposure was in many ways similar to a
sexual assault.
Briton
Neil Entwistle searched the internet for advice on killing a few days
before his wife and baby daughter were murdered, a US court has heard.
The jury was shown a diagram of major human arteries and "strike points"
in the chest, found in the internet history of Entwistle's laptop.
Detective Lawrence James, a computer specialist, told the jury that the
diagram of the major arteries had been found on a website following a
search for how to kill with a knife.
The jury of eight men and eight women also heard how the same laptop and
Entwistle's username had been used to trawl adult sex sites less than 12
hours before the how to kill with a knife search.
A
YouGov survey reveals strong UK support for pan-European games rating
system, PEGI. This was carried out on behalf of the Entertainment and
Leisure Software Publishers’ Association (ELSPA).
The survey found that a majority of British adults (67%) believe it is
important to have a single age-ratings system which would be consistent
across Europe.
ELSPA has been lobbying for a pan-European system, PEGI, as the
consistent age-rating system across the continent.
MEP Michael Cashman welcomed the latest YouGov findings. A senior member
of the European Parliament’s Justice, Home Affairs and Civil Liberties
Committee, he said: I am not surprised that most Brits believe it is
vital that we are signed-up to a pan-European rating system. Many buy
their games when they are away, and others download content from
European games companies. These are trends which will inevitably
continue. PEGI and PEGI Online offer security when UK residents buy
games from the continent– and when visiting Europeans buy games from us
during their visits.
Total sample size of YouGov research was 1990 adults. Fieldwork was
undertaken between 5th and 9th June. The survey was carried out online.
The figures have been weighted and are representative of all GB adults
(aged 18+).
Update:
Euro Pressure
20th June 2008
In a written response regarding a recent meeting of the Education, Youth
and Culture Council, The Minister of State, Department for Culture,
Media and Sport - Margaret Hodge - has reported strong backing for the
PEGI video game rating system.
Hodge states, The Commission summarised their communication on video
games and pushed member states to implement the voluntary Pan European
Game Information (PEGI) system for age rating of video games.
The
head of Xbox community developer service XNA, Chris Satchell, has said
that user generated content can be responsibly rated by an audience of
its creators' peers – and doesn’t need any intervention from the BBFC or
PEGI.
In his keynote at the GamesHorizon Conference in Newcastle, Satchell
introduced the audience to XNA’s service, Creators Club Online,
launching later in the year.
The service allows bedroom developers to share their games with one
another, and encourages the community to rate them in categories of
violence, sexual content and more – as well as giving them a critical
score.
A Beta version of the site has been running for the last four weeks, and
XNA members have already created 54 titles.
We’re giving tools to the community, but we’re not arbiters of good
taste, he said. Our only ground rules for these user-generated
games is that they don’t infringe other people’s IP and that there
aren’t things we consider obscene.
PEGI and the BBFC simply are not going to be able to rate community
content. We have to work out a way to police ourselves to avoid huge
regulatory pressure. The core of Creators Club Online take it very
seriously. If you give the community tools, they act responsibly.
A
woman who wrote jihadi poetry using the pen name “Lyrical Terrorist” has
had her terrorism conviction quashed by the Appeal Court.
Three senior judges said the jury at Samina Malik’s trial last year had
been confused and her conviction for possessing items of use to
terrorists was unsafe.
The Crown Prosecution Service indicated that it would not seek a
retrial.
Miss Malik became the first woman convicted under terrorism legislation
since 2001 when she was found guilty of possessing jihadi propaganda in
December last year. Of 21 items found in Miss Malik’s possession, 14
were propaganda items. However, she also possessed documents including
The Terrorists Handbook, The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook,
and operator manuals for firearms and anti-tank weapons.
She was given a nine-month jail sentence suspended for 18 months.
Miss Malik had also penned gruesome poetry in chatrooms praising the
beheading of hostages in Iraq. On the back of a till receipt she
scribbled: The desire within me increases everyday to go for
martyrdom.
Her conviction, under section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000, was widely
condemned as a “thought crime” by commentators and Muslim community
leaders.
But it became inevitable that she would be cleared of the crime in
February when the Appeal Court quashed the convictions of five men under
section 58 and effectively rewrote the Terrorism Act. The court ruled
then that propagandist or theological material - no matter how extreme -
could not be considered of practical use to terrorists.
But Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, presiding
at the Appeal Court, said her conviction was now unsafe: The jury was
required to consider not only documents which were capable of being of
practical utility for a person committing or preparing an act of
terrorism, but a large number of documents that were not. We consider
that there was scope for the jury to have become confused.
Age guidance on books will help buyers - and improve sales
See
full article from the
Guardian
by Simon Juden, chief executive of the Publishers Association
It's
all very well for those who have an easy familiarity with literature.
But the world of children's books does not feature in the daily lives of
hundreds of thousands of adults. And, research tells us, they are crying
out for guidance when buying a book for a grandchild, niece or nephew.
Many do not have a good local bookshop where they can get expert advice.
Where do they start?
A
senior judge urged Whitehall to investigate ways to censor internet
images which are so shocking they should never be seen.
The call came after four teenagers were jailed for a "sickening" assault
filmed on a phone.
Paul Vickers was left paralysed and blind in his right eye after being
beaten with a metal wheel brace and having his head stamped on as he
slept.
Judge David Rennie said the attack was inspired by violent images said
to be easily accessible on the web and itself was intended to be
uploaded to the net. He told the Old Bailey: I believe this was
copying and adding to the violent images already in circulation.
I am not sure if there is any sufficient censorship of material
before it finds its way into the public domain. I would urge the
Government to continue to investigate this problem to see if there is
anything else that can be done to protect people from images which are
so shocking that they should never be seen.
Oliver Skeggs was given an indeterminate sentence with a minimum term of
13 years after being convicted of attempted murder and admitting an
attack seven days earlier when a wheelchair-bound man was robbed. The
court heard how he leered into the phone camera before launching the
attack on Mr Vickers.
Ross Beeby was jailed for 12 years after admitting grievous bodily harm
with intent. He had grinned at the camera before jumping on Vickers’s
head.
Alistair Field who filmed the attack on Skeggs’s phone, was jailed for
eight years as was Terry Bryan of Quest Close, Chichester, the fourth
member of the gang. The court heard that Bryan had a series of other
"disturbing" and violent video clips on his phone, including one of a
woman being shot in the head, and another of a hostage being beheaded.
The judge told the teenagers: The fact that you wanted a video
souvenir of this attack is one of the most shocking and sickening
aspects of this case.
He said the other violent clips on Bryan’s phone appeared to be the sort
that could easily be downloaded from the internet: There is a direct
connection between the filming of the attack on Mr Vickers and violent
film clips of this sort.
A
literary war broke out in April, when the kid-lit wing of the Publishers
Association announced plans to print a suggested reading age on all
children's books. This followed research apparently showing that many
adults are wary of choosing junior volumes as gifts because of the risk
of, say, giving a novel about an adolescent being hired as a drug mule
to a sensitive eight-year-old.
Although it amounted to a radical change in the way that school-age
books have been sold, the initiative attracted little coverage at the
time. But now, six weeks later, like heroes and heroines suddenly
awaking to their special powers, children's writers, led by Pullman,
have risen up against the plan to stamp a number on their jackets.
On the side of the age stickers is the fact that there is greater
opportunity for confusion on the under-16 shelves than in adult fiction.
Many authors - including Pullman and Jacqueline Wilson, another writer
in a rage about age guidance - write different series aimed at infant
and senior schoolers.
Another argument in favour is that other art forms have long steered
material towards different birth dates: the cinematic system of
certification and also the 9pm watershed for grown-up shows that is more
or less observed by television broadcasters.
The contrary position, vigorously expressed by Pullman, is that literary
development is hugely variable. There are columnists who claim to have
been devouring War and Peace at six years old - while, routinely, there
will be children in any classroom whose reading age will be a couple of
years ahead of or behind the number of birthdays they've celebrated.
Pullman and Rowling, in particular, have demonstrated this elasticity of
appeal. Her Harry Potter books seem genuinely to have achieved the old
advertising dream of appealing to consumers from eight to 80, while he,
although the Dark Materials trilogy would seem most suited to people in
their early teens, has also found a precocious younger audience. It's
clear that such catholicism might be nobbled by declaring the age at
which stories should properly be absorbed, and it doesn't take much
imagination to predict what might happen to a 10-year-old spotted on the
school bus with a book aimed at the seven to eight-year-old.
At the moment both sides seem unyielding. The Publishers Association
insists that the number stickers will go on the front of books. And yet
writers such as Pullman, Rowling and Wilson would clearly have the
economic power to demand a retreat, backed by the threat of establishing
a new, ageless publishing house.
A comparison with cinema is instructive in a particular way. It is now
only at 15 that the state begins to take an absolute stand on what
people can see. The two lower categories - PG and 12A - leave it to the
parents or guardians to make the decisions. Those rules seem to
acknowledge that late teenagers are more homogenous in their reactions
than younger children. So, on this basis, the existing system of
children's bookselling - in which a general, invisible PG certificate
applies to all titles - might sensibly be left in place.
9
out of 10 people think there should be tighter regulation of information
on social networking websites, according to new research.
A survey commissioned by those who want to do the regulating found that
most Britons believe sites such as Facebook and MySpace should be
covered by rules that would help ordinary people complain about
intrusive material posted online.
Currently each of the major social networking sites operates under its
own set of terms and conditions. However, 89% of those surveyed by the
Press Complaints Commission said there should be a set of widely
accepted rules to help prevent personal information - such as private
photographs - being abused.
Sir Christopher Meyer, the chairman of the PCC, said there was an
"unprecedented scale" of information being put on to social networks,
and suggested members of the public needed help to deal with problems
that arise as a result. There is a need for public awareness about
what can happen to information once it is voluntarily put into the
public domain, he said.
The survey comes as the PCC seeks to expand its role as the lines
between different forms of media continue to blur. The organisation
already oversees internet and video content produced by newspaper
organisations, though the commission's director, Tim Toulmin, has stated
that he is not in favour of internet regulation.
Suggestions that the PCC would be the best body to oversee a social
networking code of conduct are likely to cause controversy. Some experts
suggested it would prove beneficial to bring some form of light
self-regulation to the internet, but questioned whether there was a real
consensus on what "intrusive" really meant. If you take pictures and
put them on Facebook, you've deliberately surrendered your privacy,
said Charlie Beckett, the director of Polis, a journalism thinktank at
the London School of Economics.
Let
us be clear. Nazism was a tyrannical system of power that murdered
millions of people. Max Mosley is a 68-year-old grey-haired businessman
who played sado-masochistic sex games with prostitutes who were said to
be dressed as concentration camp inmates. She then stuck a camera in her
bra and sold the tape to the NotW. He had consensual sex, he harmed no
one, and he used highly paid, media-savvy prostitutes, not trafficked
women. He even had a cup of tea with them afterwards.
Mosley's barrister argued that the orgy did not have Nazi connotations.
But so what if it did? I have no problem with Nazi-style orgies, if they
are consensual. I have a problem with Nazi-style genocides. Like the one
that is happening in Darfur, which is ignored, because we are too busy
bleating that Mosley's sexual fantasies are gross, and reading Heat. You
will find something gross in every bedroom.
Following
the very public revelation of his sexual predilections in March, Max
Mosley, the president of the International Automobile Federation (FIA),
faced calls for his resignation from Formula One racers and condemnation
from the sport's sponsors. But in a secret-ballot proceeding held in
Paris, Mosley secured 103 of 169 votes to win a vote of confidence from
motorsport's governing body — and the right to serve out his term as FIA
president.
The ruling comes two months after the British tabloid News of the World
posted video footage of Mosley reveling in what it described as a
chilling Nazi-style sadomasochistic orgy with five hookers. In the
video, a mock prison guard spanks Mosley while explaining his
punishment: He's serving a life sentence now for crimes he committed
before. I'm sure it won't be the last time he's bent over that bench.
Mosley, who admitted to participating in the orgy, has initiated legal
action against News of the World for claiming that his sadomasochistic
romp had Nazi and concentration-camp connotations. He said he spoke with
a German accent, ("She needs more of ze punishment"), because the women
involved were themselves German. (Mosley is the son of noted British
fascist Oswald Mosley.) But his main argument, made in a letter to FIA
officials prior to today's vote, is that his sex life is irrelevant, as
it harms no one.
Mosley has already promised not to make public appearances on behalf of
the FIA, suggesting he has plans for a quiet end to his tenure, which
expires in October 2009. The jokes and snickers will undoubtedly
continue, but they're unlikely to drive Mosley from office. He may be
bruised, but, as he has already demonstrated, he has a high tolerance
for pain.
Comment:
An Orgy of Sensibility
Thanks to Alan
The Guardian has a column discussing animal sex with
the message: Not my cup of
tea, but I can't pretend to be horribly shocked by it.
I wish the same sensible attitude would
spread to the sports section, where the front page of the same edition
had some vapourings about Max Mosley's "orgy" (i.e. mild sadomasochistic
spanking fun) with five "prostitutes" (i.e. professional dominatrices
and submissives, at least one of whom has a website making it quite
clear that clients shouldn't ask for "extras").
An
airline passenger claimed that a security guard threatened to arrest him
because he was wearing a T-shirt showing a cartoon robot with a gun.
Brad Jayakody from London, said he was stopped from passing through
security at Heathrow's Terminal 5 after his Transformers T-shirt was
deemed 'offensive.'
The IT consultant was set to fly off on a business trip to Dusseldorf in
Germany when he was pulled to one side.
Jayakody said the first guard started joking with him about the
Transformers character depicted on his French Connection T-shirt.
Then he explains that since Megatron is holding a gun, I'm not allowed
to fly, he said.
He was cooperative with the supervisor and took off the the 'offensive'
T-shirt, replacing it with another shirt in his carry on luggage.
A spokesman for Heathrow operator BAA said: If a T-shirt had a rude
word or a bomb on it, for example, a passenger may be asked to remove
it. We are investigating what happened to see if it came under this
category. If it's offensive, we don't want other passengers upset.
As
part of Liverpool Streets Ahead over the weekend, Cacahuète performers
were based in the windows of shops on Bold St. Some of the performances
were stopped by the police. A guy walking around Bold St in a loin cloth
with a fake penis. A girl in a lingerie store sitting in her underwear,
had been told to cover or up she wouldn't be allowed to perform. A lady
wrapped in clingfilm with bits covered by banana skins and various food
items had been told that some people have complained, and that
performers were being provocative. The Amy Winehouse styled performer
had been asked to remove the cocaine looking substance.
Pascal, who was the leader of the group, said that Liverpool was the
"Capital of Censorship." Bit of a shame to invite people to perform in
the Capital of Culture and then censor them.
Having been one of the performers I have to say that it really was a
travesty for these performances to be stopped - do the police now have
artistic control over this capital of culture year?
Hundreds thoroughly enjoyed the mannequins yet a minority dictated
the actions of the police. Instead of abandoning the final performance
completely we thought it would be more beneficial to make the actions of
the police known to the Liverpool public. I have seen this protest
mentioned on one website only so please keep the debate going....
The lady in her underwear in a wheelchair was told she could continue
if she covered herself up (which totally changes the meaning of the
piece) yet it was ok for a guy dressed as a pimp simulating sex with a
blow up doll! It was also ok for Kate Lawler to run the London marathon
in her underwear.
If any form of pleasure is exhibited,
Report to me and it will be prohibited.
I`ll put my foot down. So shall it be!
This is the land of the free! Rufus T Firefly in Duck Soup
Imagine
that you are the editor of a national newspaper. After launching a new
service on your website, a minority of your journalists start submitting
copy that is clearly distasteful. None of the content is libellous or in
breach of hate laws, but it would be considered as offensive by large
sections of the public. What do you do?
You could advise your journalists to desist, order a rewrite or spike
the offensive content. Beyond that, the only choice for many editors is
to fire them. But what if the questionable content is coming from your
readers? Do you treat it any differently? Would you likewise censor the
offensive content, even though it's not quite breaking the law?
A
social networking site has deleted most of its users over the age of 36
because it claims older users pose a danger of sex offending. It claims
to be forced into the action by the Government, but the part of a law it
cites is not yet in force.
Faceparty has deleted what it describes as a huge number of accounts
from its social networking site in recent weeks. It lists over 36
years old as one of its reasons for deletion: We understand that
only a minority of older users are sex offenders, but you must
understand that we cannot tell which, it says in its explanation of
the deletion of accounts.
New government legislation means we need to check older users on the
sex offenders list," says its notice. This legislation is based upon
checking email addresses against a government provided list. Faceparty
has never insisted on validated email addresses and can therefore not
participate in this new scheme.
A new law was passed earlier this month, the Criminal Justice and
Immigration Act, which contains provisions for the Secretary of State to
require sex offenders to register their email addresses or other
information. That, though, is not currently part of the law and would
require a ministerial order to become law. The law makes no reference to
the age of offenders. Neither that law nor any other suggests that
people over the age of 36 are more likely to be sex offenders.
Faceparty has defended itself against accusations that it is simply
trying to create a younger, more valuable user base for itself.
A Spokesman for
Manchester
Museum who admitted to being
out of touch and a little
behind the times
Complaints about naked mummies have led to the remains of Asru, a
mummified chantress at the Temple of Amun in Karnak, plus the
partially-wrapped male Khary and a child mummy, all being covered in
shrouds to protect their modesty.
The decision, which has prompted wholesale derision, came after
Manchester Museum said it had received 'feedback' from the public saying
it was 'insensitive to display unwrapped mummies'.
Having ordered the cover up, managers claim they are following
Government policy and are carrying out a public consultation.
Last night the museum, whose Egyptian department has a worldwide
reputation, was accused of being ridiculous and told it risked becoming
a 'laughing stock'.
Mummies at Manchester Museum
Bob Partridge, chairman of the Manchester Ancient Egypt Society, said
the cover-up was 'absolutely incomprehensible': The mummies have
always been sensitively displayed and have been educational and
informative to generations of visitors. We are shocked this has been
done in advance of any results from the public.
Josh Lennon, a museum visitor, said: This is preposterous. Surely
people realise that if they go to see Egyptian remains some of them may
not be dressed in their best bib and tucker. The museum response to
complaints is pure Monty Python - they have now covered them from head
to foot rendering the exhibition a non-exhibition. It is hilarious.
Video
games that glorify gangs and soap operas with violent storylines are
leading young people into a life of crime, says a mother whose son was
stabbed to death.
Ann Oakes-Odger told a panel of 'experts' in Birmingham led by former
Prime Minister's wife Cherie Blair that she believed over-exposure to
such images meant many young people lived in a "twilight world" between
reality and unreality.
The commission - visiting the five cities in Britain with the worst
records for gun and knife crime - also heard from Barbara Sawyers, whose
son Daniel Bogle, 19, was shot dead in Smethwick five years ago.
Ms Oakes-Odger's 27-year-old son Westley bled to death on a street in
Colchester, Essex, after being stabbed in the neck while drawing money
from a cashpoint.
If you look back when advertising first became a medium on TV, there
used to be such things as subliminal shots which were banned, said
Ms Oakes-Odger. It was banned because it was considered to be
interrupting the natural psyche of one's thinking. I believe video games
and violent computer games have the same effect.
Ms Oakes-Odger, who now works with young people highlighting the danger
of knife crime, added: I think many soaps should tone down some of
the storylines because the young mind is very impressionable. It has
been proven through studies that throughout our adult years our minds
are still capable of being malleable to information.
We have a responsibility as adults to protect our children and the
information that is input into them. If we can't tone down the
information they are receiving we must give them the balance of
information. We can't allow them to live in a twilight world of reality
and non-reality.
Evidence-taking by the commission at Birmingham Town Hall will go
towards a Channel 4 series - The Truth About Street Weapons -
examining gun and knife crime in Britain. It will be broadcast this
summer.
Figures
unearthed by Tory MP David Ruffley, showed that
not a single person received a caution for supplying 18 rated video
games and DVDs to someone underage. Only eight fines were imposed.
Ruffley, the Tories' police reform spokesman, said: Selling 18+ rated
violent computer games such as Grand Theft Auto IV to underage
children is more likely when many retailers have no fear of being
caught, as my figures demonstrate.
This poor enforcement of the law is damaging to children. But I'm not
surprised when officers are overwhelmed by a colossal amount of red
tape.
The
Starz forum, previously the Anchor Bay forum, was one of they key places
to go to keep up with cult/horror UK DVD releases (and censorship issues).
It has now, somewhat suddenly, been closed.
Marc Morris has now relaunched the forum under the new title
Cult Movie Forums.
All Anchor Bay/Starz posts have been archived and previous users of the ABUK forums will
be able to access them using their existing username and password.
Unsurprisingly new discussion topics have been defined and they are
somewhat wider in scope than before.
You
will not have seen it in the news, because for some reason the CPS
didn't call a press conference to announce it, nor did they send out a
press release for sub-editors to paste verbatim into their rags, but a
recent Operation Ore case in Belfast was concluded when the prosecutors
came to court and offered no evidence - that's NO evidence.
It was ordered that the defendant should be acquitted, and so ended
his 4 year ordeal. It's also now extremely likely that the remaining Ore
incitement cases in NI will be dealt with in the same way.
No evidence, because every single piece of the prosecution case - that
the accused had used his credit card to pay for child porn - had been
showed to be flawed beyond recognition.
Aamer
Anwar is a lawyer who unsuccessfully defended a client on terrorism
charges.
His client Mohammed Atif Siddique is currently serving eight years after
becoming the first Scot to be convicted of al-Qaeda-inspired terrorism
offences. The most serious being possessing al-Qaeda propaganda
material on his laptop computer for a purpose connected with terrorism.
He had also made a series of extremist claims to fellow students at
Glasgow Metropolitan College, including that he would "blow up" the
city.
Immediately after Siddique's trial, Anwar spoke with barely concealed
rage from the steps of the High Court in Glasgow, he spoke. He unleashed
a stinging verbal attack on Scotland's justice system.
Standing in the full glare nation's media, he described the verdict a
tragedy for justice and insisted the prosecution had been driven
by the state.
Anwar is now on trial himself accused of contempt of court as a result
of those remarks seven months before. In particular he is accused of a
common-law contempt or actions that are an affront to the court. That
might be willfully impeding the smooth running of the court, or doing
something that brings it into disrepute.
Supporters of free speech came out to support Anwar. They gathered in
their dozens outside the court building, holding banners in support of
the beleaguered lawyer.
Their message was simple: Defend Aamer Anwar. Defend the freedom of
speech.
Lord Carloway, the judge in the terror trial of Mohammed Atif Siddique,
described Anwar's statement as a multi-faceted tirade, and said
much of it was untrue or misleading. Referring the case to the panel of
three judges that yesterday began trying Anwar for contempt, Lord
Carloway said a defence lawyer had specific duties not only to his
client but to the court.
The case is unprecedented in British legal history. It has triggered
grave fears among civil-liberty groups that Scotland's judiciary could
be about to strike a serious blow against freedom of speech. The case is
likely to be ultimately decided in the European courts.
High-profile human-rights lawyers, including Michael Mansfield, Gareth
Peirce and Imran Khan, have publicly backed Anwar, as have writers,
academics, anti-war protesters and politicians.
A full-page advert in a Sunday newspaper branded the trial against Anwar
not only a violation of the right to free speech but also "an attack on
the fundamental right of all lawyers to represent their clients".
Liberty, the UK civil-liberties group, has taken a keen interest in the
case. Yesterday, a representative of the group stood before the three
judges hearing the case and argued a guilty verdict would contravene the
right to free expression enshrined in European law. Its director, Shami
Chak-rabarti, earlier told The Scotsman: The ability of a lawyer to
protest on behalf of his client is crucial to both free speech and
justice in a democracy.
But while the roar of support from legal circles in England has been
deafening, lawyers in Scotland have been conspicuously quiet. The
Scotsman understands that many were asked to sign a letter of support,
but refused. They say talk about a threat to free speech is overblown.
John Scott, president of the Edinburgh Bar Association, said: The
problem was (Anwar] was inaccurately reporting what had happened in
court. His take for the cameras of what the jurors had decided was very
misleading. Aamer said his client had been convicted of finding answers
on the internet. In truth, he was found guilty of very serious offences.
Trying him for contempt was, I think, an overreaction.
A
blogger who "let off steam" about the way he was treated by police has
been convicted of posting a grossly offensive and menacing message.
Gavin Brent was fined £150 with £364 costs by magistrates at Mold.
The court heard Brent had been charged with theft offences - which have
yet to be dealt with - and posted a message about a police officer's
new-born baby. Magistrates said any reasonable person would find the
comments menacing.
The court heard how detective constable Steve Lloyd conducted
interviews, but was not present when Brent was charged because his wife
was having a baby. Prosecutor Liz Bell said someone unfortunately told
Brent why the officer was absent.
Brent then ranted about his perceived mis-treatment at the hands of
police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
His posting ended: P.S. - D.C. Lloyd, God help your new-born baby.
In interview, he said he felt he had been mistreated and hoped the
officer would not treat his child the same way.
Brent was prosecuted under the Telecommunications Act, relating to the
sending of an electronic message.
He claimed he had not meant to be offensive, had used the blog "to let
off steam", but had not intended any harm. He apologised if it was
perceived as a threat, offered to remove the offending words, and to
write a letter of apology.
Flintshire magistrates, sitting at Mold, said the blog was articulate,
detailed, specific and critical of the police and the CPS. They said any
reasonable person would find the words about the baby to be menacing in
the context of the overall blog.
The
Starz forum, previously the Anchor Bay forum, was one of they key places
to go to keep up with UK DVD releases (and censorship issues).
It has now somewhat suddenly been closed with the following statement
from the management
As a result of the changes we are making to the
site, and after much thought and deliberation, we regret to inform
members that the forum will be shutting down as of Midnight on April
25th 2008. We hope you have enjoyed using it over the last 7 years, your
comments on ABUK releases, and what you would like to see released have
been useful and we`ve enjoyed reading your chats. Thank you for using
the forum. We`ll miss you!
Everyone at ABUK would like to thank Marc Morris who has been our
webmaster since the sites launch back in 2001 - we have to say bye to
Marc but his knowledge of our film and horror catalogue has been second
to none and he has been a huge help to us in answering your queries and
keeping the site bang up to date. Thanks Marc.
Regarding the Anchor Bay forums, Marc Morris has created a backup forum
on his own servers and will be re-launching them under the new title
Cult Movie Forums in a couple of weeks after giving them a makeover.
All posts have been archived and existing users of the ABUK forums will
be able to access them using their existing username and password when
they re-launch. I believe there will be a mass email sent out to
existing members once the relocated forums are live