ans Posted October 29, 2007 Share Posted October 29, 2007 Can I ask that people refrain from posting up details of previous incidents because basically I have no idea where we stand with the Rehabilitation of Offenders act. Playing it safe until someone who actually knows what they're talking about tells me otherwise. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Smelly Posted October 29, 2007 Share Posted October 29, 2007 Well surprise surprise lol If he was clever he would have blamed the wife Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted October 29, 2007 Share Posted October 29, 2007 I didn't think that the earlier post referred to a criminal offence, ans. Just a crash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 29, 2007 Share Posted October 29, 2007 Isn't crashing while under the influence of alcohol a criminal offence? Driving is, so surely crashing is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted October 29, 2007 Share Posted October 29, 2007 I don't think that the post in question is still around, Gladys, but I thought it referred to an earlier crash, not the one he was sacked for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Seeing as neither of us are lawyers, I think I'd rather err on the side of caution. The post is just invisible and will be made visible if I get confirmation it's allowed. Nothing sinister, just trying to keep us on the right side of the law profession. Edit: Now visible, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 We have to be careful when discussing things like road traffic incidents, From my recollection at least one previous Manx forum was closed down amidst some rather unpleasant threats and the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 For everyone You can post that someone was in an accident or that their car was damaged. That is not a crime. If you post that they drank drove, then that is a crime and if it is a long time ago it is a criminal offence to refer to it directly or indirectly You must not post that they were sent to court and convicted if it was so long agao that they are now rehabilitated It is less clear if you say they were driving dangerously, drunk or drugged 1st it implies braeching the law and secondly it implies that they might have been prosecuted and convicted. The fine, for you in posting, if you get it wrong, is £2,500 Lets make it clear, for Glady's sake, there is no suggestion that PC Moffatt was drunk when involved in an incident in which a police vehicle he was driving was involved in an accident in which the Police vehicle was written off all those years ago. We try and moderate, to protect you and the site. if something goes for a legal resaon I will try and send a PM saying why, even although that is not necessary. It takes time to review, consider delete and send a PM. If that is happening to you, wait an hour until re posting using different words Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Thank you John, but for my sake and others, if a post is made invisible, wouldn't it be sensible to make other posts that refer to it invisible until the situation is checked. Otherwise you have posts out of context which can be misconstrued and hence my remark above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 You must not post that they were sent to court and convicted if it was so long agao that they are now rehabilitated This is under the rehabilitation of offenders act? I can understand why it should be illegal to use it against someone for employment purposes etc, but illegal to talk about it? That's bizarre. If it happened it happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 There must be tonnes of biographies and newspaper pieces published that refer to spent crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Thank you John, but for my sake and others, if a post is made invisible, wouldn't it be sensible to make other posts that refer to it invisible until the situation is checked. Otherwise you have posts out of context which can be misconstrued and hence my remark above. Generally we try to. However, our first priority is to remove the content from public view. Other concerns are secondary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebees Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 If that is happening to you, wait an hour until re posting using different words is that like an appeal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 You must not post that they were sent to court and convicted if it was so long agao that they are now rehabilitated This is under the rehabilitation of offenders act? I can understand why it should be illegal to use it against someone for employment purposes etc, but illegal to talk about it? That's bizarre. If it happened it happened. Here we go - apologies for the formatting: 3(1) Subject to the following provisions of this section and to any order under section 10(1), any person who- (a) publishes, or causes or permits to be published; or (b) broadcasts, or causes or permits to be broadcast, any matter imputing that a rehabilitated person has committed or been charged with or prosecuted for or convicted of or sentenced for an offence which was the subject of a spent conviction shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £2,500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 That's mad. So is wikipedia breaking the law referring to the Redlands bust here ... link Or the Government website referring to a ministers past? Care pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.