[Closed] Mealy-mouthed

Hmmm... I dunno.

Publicly tweeting about confronting a random Muslim woman in the street and accusing her of being a terrorist sympathiser does sound a bit like "inciting racial hatred on social media" to me.

(apart from the obvious, "Islam is not a race" argument that I'm sure someone will shortly make)

Just to clarify, do you support the original tweet or are you just annoyed with the heavy handed tactics. Genuine question as it isn't clear to me in your post.

Publicly tweeting about confronting a random Muslim woman in the street and accusing her of being a terrorist sympathiser does sound a bit like "inciting racial hatred on social media" to me.

But he does not appear to have done that.

How dare the police take action against innocent white people

If you read the other stuff he'd put on facebook it may be that it's not the original tweet that might be the reason he's been arrested.

Joe Heenan wrote: "I confronted my 5 yr old son yesterday. I asked him to explain the mortgage rates. He said 'I dunno, I like Batman'. A mealy mouthed reply."

Perhaps this chaps other tweets are of more concern?

But he does not appear to have done that.

I'm only going from what the article says:

A message posted on his Twitter profile on Wednesday morning stated: "I confronted a Muslim woman yesterday in Croydon. I asked her to explain Brussels. She said 'Nothing to do with me'. A mealy mouthed reply."

I'd expect a similar police response if, for example, I tweeted about the mealy mouthed reply I got when I confronted a German woman about the holocaust.

Especially if I had a history of posting various anti-German stuff etc.

[i]I'm only going from what the article says[/i]

'cos newspapers are always in possession of (and print) all the facts around someone's arrest?

Although it comes from the Telegraph, this appears to show a slightly alternative view. He is blaming the 140 character limit for it being misconstrued. I'm still a bit uncomforable with the whole episode even as he describes it but it does confirm my own admitted prejudice against Twitter as it seems to cause so may foot in mouth moments

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/12202181/Angry-backlash-against-Croydon-man-who-confonted-Muslim-woman-and-told-her-to-explain-Brussels.html

I don't agree with the guy but I struggle to see how he is inciting anyone.

I'm not sure how else to put this;

It's not just that tweet. He was putting some stuff on facebook that was specifically anti-muslim and included suggestions of bad things being done to muslim people

The original tweet was daft but it wasn't posted in isolation, there 10-15 other posts that were more specifically anti-islamic and would (imo) fall into a far more serious category.

A riposte on Twitter:
"I confronted a woman in Croydon and asked her to explain shredless marmalade. 'Nothing to do with me'. A peely-mouthed reply."

He is blaming the 140 character limit for it being misconstrued

Anyone using the term 'towelhead' or 'Britain is for Britains' is going to struggle to convince people they aren't racist

Someone from my home town got actual JAIL TIME over "inciting violence" during the London riots via a Facebook status

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-18536940 ]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-18536940[/url]

The status itself was pretty benign I guess, but his history of being a general chav certainly didn't help (although thats not mentioned in the article on the BBC - local knowledge.)

It's not just that tweet. He was putting some stuff on facebook that was specifically anti-muslim and included suggestions of bad things being done to muslim people

Fair enough, what is amazing he went to the LSE, must have been a fish out of water there.

I don't agree with the guy but I struggle to see how he is inciting anyone.

He's inciting people to think he's a bit of a dick.

as above, being a dick on social media is not "Incitement".

Being racist makes you a dick but I don't think it should be a criminal offence. I think it's a bad sign when the police start arresting people for what they think. I don't think hatred should be illegal and I don't think inciting it should be illegal.

as above, being a dick on social media is not "Incitement".

curious what you think would be out of order then if you think what this guy says and does is OK

if you think what this guy says and does is OK

where did I say what he was saying was "OK"? 🙄

I said he's being a dick. What he is saying is not "OK"

but neither is it incitement, requiring custody.
He should be ridiculed (Twitter seems to be filling it's collective hat on that front) and exposed as being out of step with civilized thinking.

You don't think [b]inciting hatred[/b] should be illegal???

Wow!!

[i]I don't think hatred should be illegal and I don't think inciting it should be illegal. [/i]

but racial hatred and incitement to it *are* illegal and everyone (including the Croydon Cretin) know it is.

so he bangs out 20 tweets and as many facebook posts all along the theme of wanting Muslims out of the UK and then people decide he's just misunderstood and meant no harm.

he's a grown up, he may have got carried away after the attention the initial tweet got but he knew the law and should have understood the risk he was taking.

the fact he claims to work in PR is the icing on the cake, really.

Yeah, he's obviously a casually racist shitebag but IMO he hasn't actually incited racial hatred there, hes just outed himself as a ****. The internet's response seems pretty appropriate and proportionate, be a **** on the internet, get internetted. Being a **** shouldn't be an arrestable offence though or we're all screwed.

The law's definition of inciting racial hatred is pretty, well, mealy mouthed tbh but you can find the CPS guidance online. it's not exactly what you'd think though and I think that's where the "common sense" understanding goes away from the legal. It's basically down to 2 things- is a statement insulting, abusive or threatening- and tbh his initial behaviour was definitely insulting, likely abusive, possibly threatening and the tweet likewise you can definitely make a case for insulting.

And also, whether it's intended to stir up racial hatred or makes it likely that it'll be stirred up. That's the messy bit. Because it's not just discontent or hostility, it's [i]hatred[/i]. I think he obviously wanted to stir up hostility; it's harder to make a case for hatred.

It'll be interesting if his original victim comes forward; tbh I think he probably made it up. I don't think he's guilty of inciting racial hatred by twitter, personally. But if he really did harass someone in the street because of their religion, that's a different matter.

I don't think hatred should be illegal and I don't think inciting it should be illegal.

The former is impossible to police as until one espouses that hatred it is hidden. For example I hate avocado's to eat with a passion but you didn't know how much I hate them until I told you.
The latter is illegal if it is incitement to racial hatred and should rightly stay that way.

The definition of incitement is the issue here

I don't think hatred should be illegal and I don't think inciting it should be illegal.

Tricky line to draw I suspect.

To take an extreme, if someone is publicly posting faked images etc to stir up hatred, and is calling for X to be killed. Then X is killed. Shouldn't the poster bear some responsibility for that?

Likewise should groups like ISIS be censored? OR should they be allowed to freely post on the internet and hold public rallies?

I'm never keen on censorship - but I can recognise the driving forces behind it.

*self censors*

e, if someone is publicly posting faked images etc to stir up hatred, and is calling for X to be killed. Then X is killed. Shouldn't the poster bear some responsibility for that?

I think the bloke is doing a public service. He has publicly singled himself out as a racist buffoon, damaged his own social status, probably his employment prospects and given everyone else some good lessons on public decorum and the perils of being an unreasonable dickhead.

An incitement to violence is different from an incitement to hatred.

Again that's a very tricky line to draw.

If you incite hatred of X based on the idea that X want to kill you and molest your children etc then sooner or later that hatred will spill over into "self defence" violence.

If he is randomly going up to muslim women in the street and effectively accusing them of being terrorists, then I would classify him as a danger to the public, I think at the very least the police should be giving him a little scare about his behaviour.

On a purely practical matter, it wouldn't be the first time someone has been banged up more for their protection than for any crime committed...

So, could Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris et al be accused of incitement?

If they can or could have beem, then I think that we're living in a dark day for democracy.

Twitter man is a dick obviously. But wouldn't you rather the dicks out themselves so their logic can be confronted, or does the left want to give them an outlaw status and the conseuqent support that goes along with that kind of outsider romanticization.

Trump gets away with worse on a daily basis - I wonder if we could jail him if he visited the UK?

Northwind - Member
Yeah, he's obviously a casually racist idiot but IMO he hasn't actually incited racial hatred there, hes just outed himself as an idiot with a voice. The internet's response seems pretty appropriate and proportionate, be an idiot on the internet, get a response... Being an idiot shouldn't be an arrestable offence though or we're all screwed.

This (FIFM)

finbar - Member
Trump gets away with worse on a daily basis - I wonder if we could jail him if he visited the UK?

And this.

He lives next door to a muslim and likes to make ironic racist jokes. With such mitigation how can he possibly be racist?

Nahh ... everyone keeps tweeting then see if those stooopid people in the authority will arrest everyone.

Ya, they better make sure they have the budget to feed everyone when they arrest the people for questioning over night ...

Ya, let's see their budget, ya see if their budget can sustain stooopid expenses ... stop wasting public money and stop political correctness pussy footing.

What are the authority going to do? Jail people for tweeting? Even serious crime do get that ...

Bunch of zombie maggots in charge ... 🙄

Trump gets away with worse on a daily basis - I wonder if we could jail him if he visited the UK?

That was the (completely overlooked) thrust of the petition banning him from the UK: we've banned [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_banned_from_entering_the_United_Kingdom ]other people[/url] for less than he has said.

...which is pathetic.

The whole episode is regrettable really. Obnoxious man provides evidence of his obnoxiousness. Police have no alternative really. It's like filming yourself speeding and posting it on the internet (although more serious due to racial nature)

Trump gets away with worse on a daily basis - I wonder if we could jail him if he visited the UK?

...which is pathetic.

+1, actually konabunny is pretty sound on this thread.

but neither is it incitement, requiring custody.

section 19 (Public Order Act) also covers "abusive and insulting"

He shouldn't have been arrested, however ****ish his comments (and of course they were).

The internet response made me proud to be [s]British[/s] human. I love it when the vocal majority are normal, sane, un-biggoted people.

Having said that, Irishers, how [i]do[/i] you explain Bono?

Did anyone else spot what this chap's job is?

Is he your carer?

Did anyone else spot what this chap's job is?

B Ark passenger?

PR something or other

Hitchens and Dawkins et. Al. Are/were confronting mental illness/feebleness in general, a disease on society that is holding up the entire human race.

It's very different, almost polar opposite from knowingly insulting a random individual.

I'm quite glad he was arrested.. But at the same time, I wonder why police don't concentrate on more serious crime if they are so stretched and undereasorced.

I wonder why police don't concentrate on more serious crime if they are so stretched and undereasorced.

If only "serious crime" is investigated then lesser crimes are only technically illegal.

In this particular case the authority is wasting public money.

Bear in mind not all them in authority are that bright you know.

In this particular case the authority is wasting public money.

In your opinion. Others may have different opinions,

Bear in mind not all them in who complain about them in authority are that bright you know.

The tweeter may well fall into this category, amongst others......

bigjim - Member
How dare the police take action against innocent white people

this

knowingly insulting a random individual.

jimw - Member
In your opinion. Others may have different opinions,

Bear in mind not all them in who complain about them in authority are that bright you know.

The tweeter may well fall into this category, amongst others......

The way I read it the tweeter just said something after they rejected answering him.

Think about this ... just like ex-PM Gordan Brown brought made a passing comment about the "bigoted" woman, you know the passing comment when you got cheese off when someone refuses to comply with you or go against you ...

Yes, but that "something" he said may well have been quite aggressive or intimidating or, in this case, just plain stupid (in my opinion)- in that situation most people may not have wanted to answer. it was her prerogative.

We are clearly not going to agree

jimw - Member
Yes, but that "something" he said may well have been quite aggressive or intimidating or, in this case, just plain stupid (in my opinion)- in that situation most people may not have wanted to answer. it was her prerogative.

We are clearly not going to agree

This is my understanding of the description.

mealy-mouthed

adjective

afraid to speak frankly or straightforwardly.

You tell me that is a bad description. 😯

Your ex-PM Brown is much more aggressive towards that woman(public) by calling her bigoted.

Bigoted is a much more demeaning word to describe an ordinary public whether the person is educated or not. You will go ape-shite if someone call you bigot.

Remember ex-PM Brown was in position of power when he used that word whereas this person merely described the situation he encountered.

You lot are really losing the plot ... ya .. you lot or as my former colleague used to say ... you people. 🙄

edit: I think the person(s) who complained did not even understand the description or meaning and instantly took offense.

Now see this, this is a [i]proper[/i] waste of police time:
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35899697 ]North Carolina man arrested after failing to return old video rental (BBC News)[/url]

It is being reported that charges have been withdrawn after CPS became involved. Seems sensible.

mefty - Member

It is being reported that charges have been withdrawn after CPS became involved. Seems sensible.

Public money saved until the next event ... 😆

The Asian (I assume Muslim) shop keeper is Glasgow appears to have been the victim of a race hate murder. RIP and may the perpetrators spend a very long time in prison.

At least someone at the CPS told the MET to stop being dicks.

On Friday, the Metropolitan Police announced he had been charged with publishing or distributing written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, likely or intended to stir up racial hatred.

But hours later a police spokesman said Mr Doyle was "no longer charged with the offence", following a discussion with the Crown Prosecution Service.

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2016-03-26/police-drop-race-hate-charge-against-man-over-mealy-mouthed-tweet/

Ah yes it is the MET being dicks, not the man who walked up to a women in the street and verbally abused her, then boasted about it on twitter 🙄

Stoner - Did you ever catch up with the fella's other Twitter content then?

Seems to me that you made your mind up when you read the headline.

Ah yes it is the MET being dicks, not the man who walked up to a women in the street and verbally abused her, then boasted about it on twitter

As a society, we have to W/MTFU and stop trying to get people arrested for saying things that are insulting or offensive.

Ah yes it is the MET being dicks, not the man who walked up to a women in the street and verbally abused her, then boasted about it on twitter

As a society, we have to W/MTFU and stop trying to get people arrested for saying things that are stupid, insulting or offensive. Idiocy and rudeness are not legitimate police matters (as, apparently, the CPS just had to remind the Met).

Assuming the incident really happened, at what point would you say being insulted should become a crime KB? Never?

What if this guy went up to the same woman day after day and kept talking about terrorism in a rude and aggressive way. It's really not as simple as 'saying offensive things shouldn't be a crime', however much you'd like it to be.

And chakaping +1

not the man who walked up to a women in the street and verbally abused he

He wasnt arrested for that. He was arrested for Tweeting about it (if it really happened or not)

No one is saying he hasnt been a dick. My complaint is that censorship/curtailment of freedom of speech (including the right to be a dick) is more serious.

This is more to do with Stoners libertarian tendencies, and his dislike of the state.

@Stoner yes but the issue is whether it was stirring race / religious hatred. I think its hard for the Police to ignore when its written down and distributed.

I see that 'Muslim' appears to have turned into a race rather than a religion again

Stoner ignoring the question, today.
[img] [/img]

well this is a good thing. I didnt know it, not suprsingly, bit embarrassing that the MET didn't know it though!

A police spokesman said: "Following discussion with the Crown Prosecution Service, Mr Doyle is no longer charged with the offence and will not be appearing in court.

"Police may not make charging decisions on offences under Section 19 of the Public Order Act. There will be further consultation with the CPS."

http://news.sky.com/story/1667202/race-hate-charge-over-brussels-tweet-dropped

Stoner - Did you ever catch up with the fella's other Twitter content then?

No. Do I need to read more of his crap to come to the same conclusion that the police should not have attempted to charge him for his "Mealy mouthed" tweet?

The whole thing was ridiculous.

Is it illegal to be a small minded, racist bigot?

If anyone really thinks he should be prosecuted for that tweet you need to take a look at yourself.

The ridicule he received on Twitter was the correct response.

https://danbunting.wordpress.com/2016/03/26/matthew-doyle-de-arrested-a-mealy-mouthed-response/

Would we being the same level of freedom o speech outrage if this had been offered at a different target? Say going up to a Jewish person and aggressively asking them to apologise for the actions of the Israeli government, then tweeting about it and using racially offensive terminology for Jews?

I doubt it.

racially offensive terminology

where did the dick use "racially offensive terminology"?

Would we being the same level of freedom o speech outrage if this had been offered at a different target? Say going up to a Jewish person and aggressively asking them to apologise for the actions of the Israeli government, then tweeting about it etc etc

https://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/human-rights/free-speech-and-protest/speech-offences

In the tweets that you couldn't be bothered reading Stoner.

Not convinced KB, sorry.

Oh, I see, you're one of those loopy people that suspects Jews enjoy special privileges.