Wednesday 9th July ~13:20 - bag snatching mugger caught, photographed, and seen off...
Bag snatcher at M32 Mina Rd
I had just passed a man (late 20's early 30',s 6' 1", pale - see image attached) while cycling to, in the St Werburghs side of the M32 underpass - waiting at the railings looking up towards Lower Ashley Road. As I got to Mina Road I heard a woman shouting and saw this man running towards St Werbs along Mina Road with a woman giving chase and shouting - he had her bag in his bag. I intercepted him and 'persuaded' him to return the bag, the woman didn't want to involve the police and had recently been mugged and lost her ID etc. a few weeks earlier. Keep your eyes peeled if you are in the area, he's probably a junkie and claimed "it was a spur of the moment thing" - didn't look like it to me!
Brilliant. Nice bit of work there. But now tell me … What's to stop me posting a picture of my boss, neighbour or indeed a member of the BIM collective claiming that they're a bag-snatcher, junkie, thief or drug dealer?
Allowing people to post photos of individuals and claim they’re criminals is defamation, and there are laws about that. Of course the defamation laws are routinely flouted by the tabloid press where the victim is too poor to sue.
The proper course of action in this case would have been for the original poster to give the picture and a statement to the police. Not outing someone who is innocent until proven guilty in a public forum. Much as we all hate thieves and junkies, they need to be treated fairly or the whole of our society will go down the toilet.
Mob rule is mob rule, even when you call it anarchism. Either you lot are just as bad as the Daily Mail, or you need to grow up.
Also, if I was the guy in the picture, and if I had it about me, I'd now find a no-win-no-fee lawyer and take BIM for a few quid.
by nickleberryWed Jul 16, 2008 09:08 http://nickleberry-huxtable.blogspot.com
joanna,
you make a very good point. i intend to bring this up at the next meeting of the Bristol IndyMedia Collective. We always have to be careful of walking the thin line between the newswire being open for people's many different stories and perspectives... and making sure that this freedom is not abused.
Posting pictures of people who may have (tried to) commit a crime is a tricky situation. There has been a lot of content on this newswire about assaults and other crimes; it's important that people are able to warn each other if they think there's a serious danger. On the other hand, as you say, this facility could be misused and innocent people could be victimised.
My person opinion is that it is difficult to make hard and fast rules on this issue: i.e. I don't think we should ban all such postings; equally I don't think we should dismiss the possibility of abuse. Instead let me make the following general points:
1. All postings are checked to see that they conform to the editorial guidelines. In particular this stops people from being abusive in their posts. People who refer to alleged criminals, for instance, as "scumbags" are going to have their post hidden.
2. The Editorial guidelines also include the following description of posts that may be hidden: "Inaccurate: posts that are clearly inaccurate or misleading. Where it is uncertain that the intention of the posting was to mislead, the inaccuracy may be questioned or amended via a Comment, rather than the article being hidden."
I have no reason to believe that the posting above is inaccurate. But, as you point out, we can't be sure. So your comment has effectively enforced this guideline: thanks!
3. A general point: don't believe everything that you read! This goes for IndyMedia as much as it goes for the mainstream media. It seems to me that, rather than posts being hidden all the time, it is much more preferable for people engage their critical faculties, make their own minds up, and maybe post a comment if they need to. Hiding posts is always problematic and it seems best if we can do as little of this as possible. The corollary of this is that users of this site should read content with their brains in gear!
make this your indymedia front page
Wednesday July 09, 2008 15:20
by Acesabe
printable version
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (8 of 8)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Nice one! .............. RTS in its purest form!
Really good work, thank you, so much better than brighter street lighting or cops in cars!
Well done you!
A great job, well done.
I would suggest that you stick to known facts though. I am referring to the possibility that he may be a drug user.
Yea well done but you let him go! You should have called the ploice or twatted him proper at least.
You saved on bag, good, but next time he will probably get way with it, and the next and next and next......
Looks worringly like me...
Perhaps it was oxygen starvation, apparently theres a lot of it about
Brilliant. Nice bit of work there. But now tell me … What's to stop me posting a picture of my boss, neighbour or indeed a member of the BIM collective claiming that they're a bag-snatcher, junkie, thief or drug dealer?
Allowing people to post photos of individuals and claim they’re criminals is defamation, and there are laws about that. Of course the defamation laws are routinely flouted by the tabloid press where the victim is too poor to sue.
The proper course of action in this case would have been for the original poster to give the picture and a statement to the police. Not outing someone who is innocent until proven guilty in a public forum. Much as we all hate thieves and junkies, they need to be treated fairly or the whole of our society will go down the toilet.
Mob rule is mob rule, even when you call it anarchism. Either you lot are just as bad as the Daily Mail, or you need to grow up.
Also, if I was the guy in the picture, and if I had it about me, I'd now find a no-win-no-fee lawyer and take BIM for a few quid.
joanna,
you make a very good point. i intend to bring this up at the next meeting of the Bristol IndyMedia Collective. We always have to be careful of walking the thin line between the newswire being open for people's many different stories and perspectives... and making sure that this freedom is not abused.
Posting pictures of people who may have (tried to) commit a crime is a tricky situation. There has been a lot of content on this newswire about assaults and other crimes; it's important that people are able to warn each other if they think there's a serious danger. On the other hand, as you say, this facility could be misused and innocent people could be victimised.
My person opinion is that it is difficult to make hard and fast rules on this issue: i.e. I don't think we should ban all such postings; equally I don't think we should dismiss the possibility of abuse. Instead let me make the following general points:
1. All postings are checked to see that they conform to the editorial guidelines. In particular this stops people from being abusive in their posts. People who refer to alleged criminals, for instance, as "scumbags" are going to have their post hidden.
2. The Editorial guidelines also include the following description of posts that may be hidden: "Inaccurate: posts that are clearly inaccurate or misleading. Where it is uncertain that the intention of the posting was to mislead, the inaccuracy may be questioned or amended via a Comment, rather than the article being hidden."
I have no reason to believe that the posting above is inaccurate. But, as you point out, we can't be sure. So your comment has effectively enforced this guideline: thanks!
3. A general point: don't believe everything that you read! This goes for IndyMedia as much as it goes for the mainstream media. It seems to me that, rather than posts being hidden all the time, it is much more preferable for people engage their critical faculties, make their own minds up, and maybe post a comment if they need to. Hiding posts is always problematic and it seems best if we can do as little of this as possible. The corollary of this is that users of this site should read content with their brains in gear!