Saying someone 'butt ugly' can affect the outcome of a trial

Discussion in 'The Quarterdeck' started by NotmeChief, Jun 10, 2010.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. What bollox to close a thread that had only reported what is out there in the world for all to see and had no comments whatsoever to do with here being guilty or not.

    I have to agree now with some earlier threads about being over keen on moderating.

    Say you would or you wouldn't cannot influence a jury in any way.
  2. Re: Saying someone 'butt ugly' can affect the outcome of a t

    No fault on the moderators' part as they are simply protecting RR from potentially costly litigation. Like ARRSE, it is closely monitored by the media where Service matters are concerned. If you have any doubts about this, it is amply demonstrated by this Daily Mail article among many others. I saved this particular example to remind myself to watch what I say as it quotes me twice (under different user names):

    Excerpt from Daily Mail article of 24 Nov 2007

    Any defendant in a trial must always be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Suggestions, no matter how flippant, that they deserve a particular punishment constitute a presumption of guilt. Even "irreverent" comments about a defendant are defamatory and can be construed as prejudicial to their case. See Your rights - About Contempt of Court.
  3. NotmeChief
    Someone did say she looked like Didier Drogba and everyone hates that cnut. I could believe a jury would find someone guilty based on that alone.
  4. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    NMC: It's the CO's box of toys - if you don't like the rules, take it up with them.
  5. No argument with that and they may have been given explicit "warnings" in the past. However, following the link NG gave, this is quite interesting.

    "What Amounts to Contempt of Court

    A publication [I assume that RR/Arrse are electronic publications.] must create a substantial risk of serious prejudice to the course of justice for it to amount to contempt. In determining whether a publication has created a substantial risk of serious prejudice, the courts will consider all the circumstances surrounding the publication and the proceedings in question. It is clear that for a publication to be contempt a slight or trivial risk of serious prejudice is not enough nor is a substantial risk of slight prejudice.

    In making an assessment of whether the publication does create a substantial risk of serious prejudice the court will consider:

    •The likelihood of the publication coming to the attention of a potential juror.
    •The likely impact of the publication on an ordinary reader at the time of publication.
    •The residual impact of the publication on a notional juror at the time of trial.
    In assessing the likelihood of a publication coming to the attention of a potential juror, the court will consider whether the publication is distributed in the area from which jurors are likely to be drawn and the number of copies circulated.
    In assessing the likely impact of the publication on an ordinary reader, the court will consider the prominence of the article in the publication and the novelty of the content of the article in the context of likely readers.

    The court will also take into account the length of time between publication and the likely date of trial, the focusing effect of listening over a prolonged period to evidence in a case, and the likely effect of the judge’s directions to a jury.

    In 2002 the Sunday Mirror was found guilty of contempt in relation to its publication of an article during the 2001 trial of the Leeds United footballers Lee Bowyer and Jonathan Woodgate. The article, released while the jury were deliberating, strongly suggested that the assault with which the two men were charged had been racially motivated, despite the judge stressing in his summing-up that the prosecution were not alleging a racist motive. It was found by the court that the article created an atmosphere in which justice could not be done, and a re-trial had to be ordered. Despite there being no suggestion that the newspaper had intended to prejudice the trial, the High Court found it guilty of contempt under the strict liability rule.

    ]It should be noted that even irreverent comment about defendants in a forthcoming criminal trial may constitute contempt of court. In 1996 the Court of Appeal found that the makers of the television programme Have I Got News For You were in contempt of court when jokes were made that the Maxwell brothers (who were to be tried for the Mirror Group pension fraud) were obviously guilty of fraudulent conduct, even though the programme was broadcast six months before the trial."

    Firstly, I read this from the perspective that if a paper published irreverent comments quoted from RR/Arrse it would be them in contempt due to the red highlighting (RR has around 6.6k users the ave circ of the top 7 papers is 400k). Secondly, if the comments are about appearance rather than guilt is that still contempt?Any legal eagles care to comment?

  6. Haven't said I disagree with the rules, but there is nothing whatsoever prejudicial or influential in saying if you would throw one up her or not. :)
  7. Re: Saying someone 'butt ugly' can affect the outcome of a t

    I'm pretty sure that my comment saying she was 'butt ugly' was not the reason for it being pulled mucker.

    More likely it was pre-emptively pulled in anticipation of worse to come.
  8. Re: Saying someone 'butt ugly' can affect the outcome of a t

    No JJ, I have it on good authority that it was pulled because of your comment.

    A potentially informative and interesting thread has been ruined because of you.

    Next time I suggest you consider the consequences of your actions before making rash comments you butt ugly felch bosun.

    Edited to add: Anyone know what happened to that thread with the sprog female officer? I thought I was in there.
  9. Re: Saying someone 'butt ugly' can affect the outcome of a t

    I started to believe your account had been hijacked by lesbian vegetarians, until the third, delightful stanza kicked in.

    You chicken strangling cum magnet.
  10. Re: Saying someone 'butt ugly' can affect the outcome of a t

    .....and Jo-Jo? He came over from ARRSE, where he had an O2 tag, but now his account there is 'suspended'

    Guess he's trying for a Full House. All credit for effort, though. :roll:
  11. Re: Saying someone 'butt ugly' can affect the outcome of a t

    Aahh it's good to be back. I'd missed you, you complete and utter sheep's cunt.
  12. Re: Saying someone 'butt ugly' can affect the outcome of a t

    My tag was seen by many as a medal, for offering to dry-bum a late aborted foetus as it emerged out of a US Marine's strangled wife's uterus.

    I asked for it to be suspended because I was being hounded by cock hungry weirdos who wanted me to punch them whilst violently shagging them.
  13. Re: Saying someone 'butt ugly' can affect the outcome of a t

    Yeah sorry about that, I was going though a bit of a weird phase.
  14. Yep, that was me. She does though.
  15. I'd still do her.
  16. I would if you were on the other end with a camcorder and a scythe.
  17. We could make this happen.

    I have an oppo who is a screw at Dartmoor nick. Chances are she is there, he owes me a favour anyway.
  18. I've an oppo who is now a chef there :lol:

Share This Page