On 24 Jan 2012 at 2:50pm Legal advisor wrote:
Webbo has been sent an email in which it is made very clear to him the potential for people to be prosecuted under the Protection from harassment act 1997.
There have been some people on here that seem to think they can name people or persons on here in regard to their lifestyle or personal situations.
You all need to be told that this persistant harassment can result to a fine and or imprisonment of up to six months. It would be very easy to find you all using ISP address systems.
Hopefully this will make you all think from now on before you continue with your 'HATE CAMPAIGNS'
On 24 Jan 2012 at 2:56pm Webbo wrote:
I haven't received an email about that, could you resend it?
On 24 Jan 2012 at 3:00pm huw wrote:
Can I sue myself?
On 24 Jan 2012 at 3:01pm Legal advisor wrote:
The post below by 'curious' is clearly enticing people into another discussion where a name or names will be mentioned.
The email was as follows.
This latest posting is enticing people to name me once again and cause
further bad feeling. It is contrary to the protection from harassment
act of 1997 ( The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 is intended to
prevent 'stalking' and other similar unsocial conduct. It states that a
person must not pursue a course of conduct which amounts to harassment
of another, and which that persons knows, or ought to know, amounts to
harassment of another. This includes by email or by other computer
related means such as discussion forums.Under this act the definition
of harassment is behaviour which causes alarm or distress. The Act
provides for a jail sentence of up to six months or a fine. There are
also a variety of civil remedies that can be used including awarding of
damages, and restraining orders backed by the power of arrest)
I suspect you will now take this very seriously as you and the people
responsible for this campaign are jointly liable for prosecution.
On 24 Jan 2012 at 3:03pm Legal advisor wrote:
Sorry for the awful layout, I copy and pasted the email.
On 24 Jan 2012 at 3:15pm Ed Can Do wrote:
It wouldn't be that easy to find us all using IP addresses sadly. Anyone using a proxy or posting from a phone (Generally a dynamic IP range) or from a public computer will in fact be virtually untraceable from their IP address. Even to get a person's details from their ISP would require the CPS to already be confident enough of a prosecution in the public interest to bother demanding the ISP release the details of the poster.
On 24 Jan 2012 at 3:25pm Kettle wrote:
Although I agree with 'Legal Advisor' in the main - people shouldn't be named on the forum or we will be unable to speak freely - I think that this person is as much a professional advisor as my ar£e. Except that when my arĀ£e speaks it is much more worrying.
Not having an axe to grind I thought that the post referred to was a genuine one and was about to reply. I won't now though, but not because I think that 'enticing people into another discussion where a name or names will be mentioned' has suddenly become a crime.
On 24 Jan 2012 at 4:13pm DFL wrote:
Interesting legislation, I didn't realsie that you hade to have committe dthe offence twice in order to be charged (see section 7).
Check it out here »
On 24 Jan 2012 at 4:57pm Rods Tiger wrote:
The original post reads like one of those phishing emails from Nigeria, think I would get a different Legal Advisor if this one were mine. What a load of tosh !
On 24 Jan 2012 at 5:14pm Webbo wrote:
I still haven't received an email from you Legal Advisor, could you resend it?
On 24 Jan 2012 at 5:37pm Tango wrote:
This is a hoot!
Maybe we should all post on mobiles then throw the SIMM cards in the bin like they do in the wire!
Maybe those insulted will be asking for money via Western Union!!
On 24 Jan 2012 at 6:56pm Fartington Greedbucket wrote:
My cousin Jocasta looks like sodding tractor.Go on sue me if you dare.What Ho!
On 24 Jan 2012 at 9:36pm expat two wrote:
Legal advisor, when you say ISP address, do you mean IP address? Shouldn't someone in the position you claim to be know the difference? Or are you just incompetent?
On 24 Jan 2012 at 10:43pm Gazebo wrote:
Nice try matey - seems your ploy to 'frighten' the free speakers has misfired.
On 25 Jan 2012 at 8:23am LEGAL PIRATE wrote:
He means the institue of sales promotion.
Check it out here »
On 25 Jan 2012 at 1:05pm observer wrote:
Anyone who slags someone on the forum is a bully and a coward, unless he is man enough to disclose his identity.
On 25 Jan 2012 at 3:09pm PMSL wrote:
Sympathetic human being, I've never laughed so much as I have at your comment. You are the only one that seems to be on the ball. He is also excellent at copying and pasting legal documents. Thank you for making me laugh today . Sue away legal advisor, you don't have a leg to stand on.
On 25 Jan 2012 at 4:55pm Born and bread wrote:
If legal advisor is who I think he is then he has a cheek to put this thread up. He has harassed numerous people in Lewes, bullied many physically and mentally, also many members of this forum and because he might be getting his just desserts he is spitting his dummy out of his pram. I personally can't see any thread that mentions him except the one he has started so maybe he should just keep quiet and crawl back into the corner you came out of.
On 25 Jan 2012 at 6:42pm vix wrote:
this is so funny what a tit he really is!
On 25 Jan 2012 at 8:26pm Boo Khaki wrote:
Who has been named, and where (one assumes Legal Advisor but as they aren't named how can we tell)?
We can all Sue you Huw if that's your name of preference now - Sue it shall be
On 25 Jan 2012 at 8:58pm Curious wrote:
Legal advisor I'm at college and am doing a story on crime and punishment and was wanting some feedback from the public. You seriously have some issues if you think it was about you.
On 25 Jan 2012 at 10:26pm Chuck wrote:
You've got to admit he's great entertainment!
On 26 Jan 2012 at 7:15am Pot kettle black wrote:
So if it is on here is is harassment, but if you yourself put awful 'hate campaign' type messages about your ex on Facebook, that is allowed? Is there a difference?
On 26 Jan 2012 at 9:12am Born and bread wrote:
Pot kettle black, I think it's one set of rules for him and another set for everyone else.
On 26 Jan 2012 at 6:19pm Rickshaweddie wrote:
If harassment is sustained over a period of time I wonder if that legislation could be used against the traffic wardens in town. They harass people under that definition so could a prosecution be u drtaken ESP for the ones that regulary lie in wait near schools on dropoff time.?
On 26 Jan 2012 at 10:43pm Sympathetic human being wrote:
Censorship on here is getting a bit heavy handed. You can't even say something nice abut someone without the post being removed!