This article is from November 17th, so a couple days old, but I found it worthwhile.

    • _Milanista_@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Justice imo. You don’t mock a child who lost a battle to cancer. No excuses for that. Fucker got what he deserved.

      Hope he enjoys the 200 hours unpaid graft too.

        • Outrageous_Pension90@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Shouldn’t even been a crime for the authorities to prosecute. This was something that should of been settled between the team and him. Ban him from attendance. This is censorship whether we like the results or not.

          • Feed_me_cocaine@alien.topB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Freedom of speech doesn’t exist in the UK and it never has. The right to freedom of expression is subject to a range of restrictions in UK law, including the: Malicious Communications Act 1988 and the Communications Act 2003, which criminalises “indecent or grossly offensive” messages and threats.

    • Ryan8Ross@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the fact that he printed something out at home shows it wasn’t a complete spur of the moment thing and that’s why its a bit harsher.

      When youre at home whipping up something to make fun of a child of cancer, how does nothing in your brain go off telling you to stop?

    • jimbo_kun@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reading through the list of consequences, the social consequences were probably a sufficient deterrent. Losing jobs and banned from football matches (the football association being distinct from the government).

      Not a fan of governments getting involved in prosecuting speech. I think social sanctions and consequences are more appropriate, even for heinous speech like this.

      • terryjuicelawson@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The odd thing is, what are these social consequences? Getting abuse and threats to the point of moving home is also something that needs acting on, surely. Or are they just deciding who can and can’t have abuse aimed at them?

        • jjw1998@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean they probably would act upon it but things like that are extremely easy to do anonymously, compared to being stupid enough to do what this guy did at a football match