I think putting him on the list for a short while would be punishment enough, no need for jail time, the embarrassment he'd suffer would be deterrent enough for me, whether hes a genuine **** or not. No punishment at all would send out totally the wrong message, people need to know that what they say on social media has consequences.
Whilst i agree with the need for a strong punishment, it's surely ethically wrong to put someone on the list for something which they havent actually committed?
But the list is for vile offenders, not twitter trolls. My point is that if you start putting all twitter trolls on it then you would end up with a huge list of people who don't have any intent to do so - often children who need teaching a firm lesson without having their entire live ruined from one poor moment of judgement - and it would 'weaken' the effect of the list if people started to know that people on there could just be a troll rather than a vile offender. Or am i talking rubbish?
I see your point, but then we move into a grey area of whether he meant it or not. Of course hes going to say he was trolling, as he'll see it as the easiest way to avoid action, but if the Vardys are pressing charges, its not going to be financial compensation they are after, they would want to see some sort of justice handed out. Im sure they could attempt to ban him from using computers for x time, but a) they can't enforce that and b) it would ruin his life even more than being on the list if he indeed is in school and is needing one for education. Maybe they would go with something as soft as a fine, but thats hardly any justice for a 1 year old who can't defend herself. I've heard that the amount of time you get put on the list is 5 years, but i honestly don't want to google it to make sure!
Id disagree - he would be better off not having a computer rather than being on that list. Once your on that list, your life is effectively over - no one will employ you and everyone hates you. A big fine would be effective - the Vardy's dont need the money but the loss of money to the lad (can a 14 yo pay it?) would effect it. In my mind, the punishment would be best to go through a course on using the internet and then community service. That way it helps them to learn to prevent it again, and then works as a deterrent with the community service.
I think it stays on your record for life though but, like you, really dont fancy googling it myself either!!
If you start putting people on the list and making people aware that if you start noncing about on social media then you will end up on the list then it'll soon die down. I agree that peoples lives will be ruined, but it's not like it's not common sense. Serves them right for being a complete twat.
But you can't just ruin peoples lifes to make a point. Imagine if you just wrote a stupid post in the heat of the moment (particuarly if your a child) and then have your entire life ruined by people thinking your a *****file without you actually being one. Thats ethically immorale.
I've googled it for you. Q&A in The Guardian How long do offenders remain on the register? It depends on the offence. Those given a jail sentence of more than 30 months for sexual offending are placed on the register indefinitely. Those imprisoned for between six and 30 months remain on the register for 10 years, or five years if they are under 18. Those sentenced for six months or less are placed on the register for seven years, or three and a half years if under 18. Those cautioned for a sexual offence are put on the register for two years, or one year if under 18. What is the sex offenders register? The sex offenders register contains the details of anyone convicted, cautioned or released from prison for sexual offence against children or adults since September 1997, when it was set up.
Sorry Ed, but disgusting comments like that about children is far more than a "poor moment of judgement"
