The Argus comments section

L

Lenny Rider

Well-known member

Sep 15, 2010

5,430

• Feb 24, 2014

• #1

Do they toss a coin in the newsroom to decide whether or not to have them?

Being a technophobe I can't put the link up but they ran a story at the weekend about a possible re trial over the death of the young footballer Connor Saunders.

The comments that follow the story are on the cusp of disgusting/libellous, and possibly could affect a juries view in another trial.

 

Acker79

Well-known member

NSC Patron

Nov 15, 2008

31,863

Brighton

• Feb 24, 2014

• #2

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1103...vidence__emerges_in_death_of_Connor_Saunders/

 

Grombleton

Surrounded by <div>s

Dec 31, 2011

7,356

• Feb 24, 2014

• #3

It's almost as depressing as reading YouTube comments.

 

G

Gwylan

Well-known member

Jul 5, 2003

31,339

Uffern

• Feb 24, 2014

• #4

It's not a very edifying spectacle but not seen anything libellous. Most of the comments appear to be implying that the guy who was killed was a bit of a drunk and a bully. I'm sure it's upsetting for the parents but have seen far worse on the comments page.

I quite like comments sections on newspapers but the the Argus comments section is populated by the idiotic, deranged and near-psychopathic - I'm only surprised that the Greens haven't been blamed.

 

L

Lenny Rider

Well-known member

Sep 15, 2010

5,430

• Feb 24, 2014

• Thread starter
• #5

Gwylan said:

It's not a very edifying spectacle but not seen anything libellous. Most of the comments appear to be implying that the guy who was killed was a bit of a drunk and a bully. I'm sure it's upsetting for the parents but have seen far worse on the comments page.

I quite like comments sections on newspapers but the the Argus comments section is populated by the idiotic, deranged and near-psychopathic - I'm only surprised that the Greens haven't been blamed.

Click to expand...

But would that not hamper finding a impartial jury locally?

 

RowleyBirkinQ.C(deceased)

New member

Dec 16, 2010

3,613

Over there

• Feb 24, 2014

• #6

The Argus are very silly for allowing a comments section under the article, and that should be taken down, but I guess that's what the Argus wanted. Could I just say, lets not engage in the same slanging and conjecture that's under that piece, we don't want to be giving Bozza another legal headache

 

Bozza

You can change this

Helpful Moderator

Jul 4, 2003

55,736

Back in Sussex

• Feb 24, 2014

• #7

Gwylan said:

It's not a very edifying spectacle but not seen anything libellous. \

Click to expand...

You can't libel the dead.

 

G

Gwylan

Well-known member

Jul 5, 2003

31,339

Uffern

• Feb 24, 2014

• #8

Bozza said:

You can't libel the dead.

Click to expand...

Exactly

 

Bozza

You can change this

Helpful Moderator

Jul 4, 2003

55,736

Back in Sussex

• Feb 24, 2014

• #9

Lenny Rider said:

But would that not hamper finding a impartial jury locally?

Click to expand...

Contempt of court? I'm no expert but with the trial done and dusted, as things stand, I'm not sure there'd be a case to answer to currently.

If a re-trial had been scheduled, i suspect it would be a different story.

 

Goldstone1976

We Got Calde in!!

Helpful Moderator

NSC Patron

Apr 30, 2013

13,787

Herts

• Feb 24, 2014

• #10

Bozza said:

You can't libel the dead.

Click to expand...

Indeed. Which is why the BBC et al can get away with calling Savile a "serial sex offender" even though he was never even tried, let alone found guilty. NB: I'm not saying Savile was innocent, just providing an example of how it's ok to say anything about the dead.

 

Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch

NSC Patron

Oct 27, 2003

21,018

The arse end of Hangleton

• Feb 24, 2014

• #11

And yet the Argus block comments on ALL traveller stories - it does seem a bizarre policy.