3 ms·

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/14/transgender-tweet-police-acted-unlawfully https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/14/transgender-... [

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/14/transgender-tweet-police-acted-unlawfully https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/14/transgender-... [2] https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Scottow-v-CPS-judgment-161220.pdf https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Scottow-... ”Margaret Dodd of one offence of improper use of a public communications network, contrary to section 127(2)(c) of the Communications Act 2003. This provides that a person commits an offence if “for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another [she] … persistently makes use of a public electronic network”.” [3] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/dec/23/uk-police-leaders-non-crime-hate-incidents-scrapped https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/dec/23/uk-police-le... Regarding Graham Linehan who is by far the best example.

junon 8mo ago
[1] is illegal Not sure what [2] is about. [3] doesn't appear relevant either.
- Argonaut998 8mo ago
  “Is illegal” Well yes, that’s my point. :) 2. Is a woman being arrested and charged with causing “anxiety” for a series of tweets. 3. Is the same; wrongthink guised as “threats” etc If you just want to defend the censorship as is your right then just say so instead doing the usual: “It’s not happening” “Ok. It’s happening and that’s a good thing” Rigmarole and wasting my time.