I think we all have an idea of what he was hoping to achieve with the sending of the scan. But, the law should not work on idea and assumptions, it should work on facts and hard evidence. For example, was there any threat of harm in the picture he sent, any threatening words?wonder what he was hoping to achieve sending a picture of a baby scan to the pregnant partner of some guy he fell out with on Twitter...
That’s not really comparable though is it?I want to add, were the alleged threats that Alex made of a violent nature or were they threats of legal action? If it is the latter, then what about private parking companies sending repeated letters to people, threatening legal action? What about the TV licensing Inspectors knocking on people's doors and threatening legal action?
Is it illegal to contact someone and threaten legal action?
One of the alleged victims in a statement said that their distress was caused by the threat of legal action. We can't have one rule for one person and different rules for organisations. When it comes to the law, it should be judged based in evidence of criminal offences.That’s not really comparable though is it?
I am not disputing that there is a strong weighted potential claim for harrassment there.Twitter followers to harass you, send you several hundred emails, encouraged you to kill yourself
They’re not ‘alleged’ victims. He’s been found guilty!One of the alleged victims in a statement said that their distress was caused by the threat of legal action. We can't have one rule for one person and different rules for organisations. When it comes to the law, it should be judged based in evidence of criminal offences.
This is the kind of attitude towards sentencing that I disagree with. Belfield may have been arrogant but that in itself is not a crime. The key fact is that he showed remourse during the trial.would imagine the judge was wise enough to smell an arrogant so and so who needed to be made an example of.
- a quote from Alex's barrister."He said he could see their distress in court and feels deeply sorry for what he did."
His barrister said he is "deeply sorry for what he did".When did he show remorse?! As far as I can see he hasn’t shown any at all given by his behaviour.
He was taking the piss out of witness statements daily on YouTube, how was that remorse? He only said he felt sorry when he was about to be sentenced.The key fact is that he showed remourse during the trial. - a quote from Alex's barrister.
EXACTLY. Of what. I read or watched on Alex’s channel he asked ‘smack’ about people. Exactly what we do here.Love him or hate him or indifferent to him this sentence should shock everyone !!!!!
I nearly burst out crying when I saw it. And I think he's a twat.
It could be you next.
And people calling him vile are rejoicing at a man being sentenced for not really doing much harm except by words, compared to other criminals.
We all speak venom about others on Tattle.
I am not sure why the judge would find that relevant to this case, or his sentencing. Hmmm.The judge referred to him as "a member of the LGBT community",
Don't other people get restraining orders where there have not been convictions (i.e. against ex-partners and so on)?View attachment 1583018
How can someone be issued a restraining order against someone that they have NOT been convicted of stalking?!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?