That example is not the justice system, that’s an example of a company being **** scared of civil action from another litigious company with deep pockets. I’ll tell you for nowt that currently the justice system is filing complex high value fraud cases in the ‘too difficult’ pile, I’ve witnessed this first hand. Limited court time means the CPS are currently only interested in easy wins, whether the victim is corporate or a member of the public.
Just what is racial content these days? In fact what is anything, no one knows what they can or can't say. Are black people black people, or coloured people? Is coffee bad for you? How many eggs a day are ok? I s the leader of Burma a terrorist?
If they deleted every Troll/Abusive comment they would lose most of their income so it is not in their interests to do it If all governments banded together and fined them for every abuse that was not deleted it might make a difference But I can't see that happening
I'll let the person who struggled with his own identity reply, when he realised he had vitiligo.... But, if you're thinkin' about my baby It don't matter if you're black or white I said if you're thinkin' of being my baby It don't matter if you're black or white I said if you're thinkin' of being my brother It don't matter if you're black or white
Whilst you certainly make a good point about the CPS only going for what they think are close certainties at present, I stand by my original comments. I remember 5/6 years ago, I saw two people who went to my school both in the local paper. One got 3 years for the pirating of DVD's, and the other got 18 months (suspended for a year) for grooming a 13 year old girl. Through conversations I found out that it was both's first convictions, and that they both plead guilty. What humane person can justify that? Our justice system reflects the nation's most powerful people over the centuries, usually those whose fortune lies in owning large parts of land etc. It means that it certainly leans more towards protecting property than people.
If you are rich and make 100k a week plus, and someone abuses them online, or someone in the limelight, it's a story.
You defo have a point btw, I didn’t mean to come across as decrying the principle of what you were saying there. ‘justice’ is subjective, and calls are made by humans, albeit within guidelines, and without doubt the level of ‘justice’ can be swayed by cash and influence, whether directly though the quality of defence or indirectly via judge’s and juries assumptions, unconscious bias and preconceptions. The examples you’ve given there are impossible to truly pass a view on without knowing the full details of both cases, but on face value, you’d have to say that seems wrong on a human level. I’d wager that most people don’t get that under the current legal aid rules, you could get falsely accused of whatever by whoever, but if you end up in Crown Court and have a disposable household income of £37,500 or savings beyond £30k, you’re paying for it. All of it.
Sound mate, I didn't mean to come across as confrontational/argumentative so apologies if so. Had some bad news today so had a couple of drinks. You make a good point about legal aid, though that's a bit of a lottery. I remember as a kid when homeless (bout 16/17) getting off a petty crime I was guilty with legal aid. Same year my pal got found guilty of something he didn't do when his old man paid grands for a solicitor I very much I know that that's not the norm though lol.