'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Raggamuffin » Mon May 17, 2021 3:03 am

xtras1 wrote:Like you rags I've not followed this story.. but did have a nose around, seems Riley has a habit of throwing the bait for the others to chew on.. her 'supporters 'then abused the 16 year old whilst Riley sat back..



https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/12/ ... able-teen/


Thanks for posting that - it's the first article I've seen which explains anything. Riley is being held responsible for what others say then - that's just stupid IMO. How was she to know that the girl had mental health issues anyway?
User avatar
Raggamuffin
 
Posts: 38416
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:51 am

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Guest » Mon May 17, 2021 6:44 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
xtras1 wrote:Like you rags I've not followed this story.. but did have a nose around, seems Riley has a habit of throwing the bait for the others to chew on.. her 'supporters 'then abused the 16 year old whilst Riley sat back..



https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/12/ ... able-teen/


Thanks for posting that - it's the first article I've seen which explains anything. Riley is being held responsible for what others say then - that's just stupid IMO. How was she to know that the girl had mental health issues anyway?

You didn't read enough.

When Rachel Riley was told what had happened she did not apologise or try to make amends instead she sued the journalist who drew the matter to her attention. And it's not the first time she's done that.

At best she is trying to get paid for starting a campaign of online abuse against a 16 year old girl.

You and she belong together, she blames a journalist for outing her actions and you have tried to blame her victim for being the target of them.
User avatar
Guest
 

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Raggamuffin » Mon May 17, 2021 8:47 am

Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:
xtras1 wrote:Like you rags I've not followed this story.. but did have a nose around, seems Riley has a habit of throwing the bait for the others to chew on.. her 'supporters 'then abused the 16 year old whilst Riley sat back..



https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/12/ ... able-teen/


Thanks for posting that - it's the first article I've seen which explains anything. Riley is being held responsible for what others say then - that's just stupid IMO. How was she to know that the girl had mental health issues anyway?

You didn't read enough.

When Rachel Riley was told what had happened she did not apologise or try to make amends instead she sued the journalist who drew the matter to her attention. And it's not the first time she's done that.

At best she is trying to get paid for starting a campaign of online abuse against a 16 year old girl.

You and she belong together, she blames a journalist for outing her actions and you have tried to blame her victim for being the target of them.


What did she have to apologise about? I didn't know that you are responsible for the behaviour of your "followers" on Twittter.
User avatar
Raggamuffin
 
Posts: 38416
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:51 am

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Guest » Mon May 17, 2021 1:22 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:
xtras1 wrote:Like you rags I've not followed this story.. but did have a nose around, seems Riley has a habit of throwing the bait for the others to chew on.. her 'supporters 'then abused the 16 year old whilst Riley sat back..



https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/12/ ... able-teen/


Thanks for posting that - it's the first article I've seen which explains anything. Riley is being held responsible for what others say then - that's just stupid IMO. How was she to know that the girl had mental health issues anyway?

You didn't read enough.

When Rachel Riley was told what had happened she did not apologise or try to make amends instead she sued the journalist who drew the matter to her attention. And it's not the first time she's done that.

At best she is trying to get paid for starting a campaign of online abuse against a 16 year old girl.

You and she belong together, she blames a journalist for outing her actions and you have tried to blame her victim for being the target of them.


What did she have to apologise about? I didn't know that you are responsible for the behaviour of your "followers" on Twittter.

I feel you're being deliberately obtuse here and are trying to defend indefensible actions. If you cannot see what Rachel Riley did wrong you are in a very small minority that thankfully does not include the judge who has thrown out the defence you have attempted to make.

There is no way any of Rachel Riley's followers would have been aware of who Rosie was if not for Riley's reckless and irresponsible actions.
User avatar
Guest
 

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby drum » Mon May 17, 2021 1:25 pm

'Rosie' was well known around Twitter long before RR started picking on her.
User avatar
drum
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 5:46 pm
Location: Moscow, Scotland

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Grafenwalder » Mon May 17, 2021 2:58 pm

I wonder what Rachel Riley had to say about the Israeli gang rapists a couple of years ago in Cyprus who returned home to a heroes welcome at Ben Gurion Airport dancing and chanting, "the Brit is a whore"?

https://www.timesofisrael.com/some-in-i ... gang-rape/
User avatar
Grafenwalder
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 11:17 pm

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Raggamuffin » Mon May 17, 2021 3:32 pm

Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:
Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:
xtras1 wrote:Like you rags I've not followed this story.. but did have a nose around, seems Riley has a habit of throwing the bait for the others to chew on.. her 'supporters 'then abused the 16 year old whilst Riley sat back..



https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/12/ ... able-teen/


Thanks for posting that - it's the first article I've seen which explains anything. Riley is being held responsible for what others say then - that's just stupid IMO. How was she to know that the girl had mental health issues anyway?

You didn't read enough.

When Rachel Riley was told what had happened she did not apologise or try to make amends instead she sued the journalist who drew the matter to her attention. And it's not the first time she's done that.

At best she is trying to get paid for starting a campaign of online abuse against a 16 year old girl.

You and she belong together, she blames a journalist for outing her actions and you have tried to blame her victim for being the target of them.


What did she have to apologise about? I didn't know that you are responsible for the behaviour of your "followers" on Twittter.

I feel you're being deliberately obtuse here and are trying to defend indefensible actions. If you cannot see what Rachel Riley did wrong you are in a very small minority that thankfully does not include the judge who has thrown out the defence you have attempted to make.

There is no way any of Rachel Riley's followers would have been aware of who Rosie was if not for Riley's reckless and irresponsible actions.


I thought the judge hadn't thrown out her claim that it was libellous. They've allowed Sivier's appeal that he said what he did in the public interest. I could be mistaken about though, so feel free to correct me.

Do you think that anyone who clicks "follow" is automatically linked to the person they're following, and that if the follower says something bad it's the fault of the person they're following? As far as I can see, Riley didn't bully the girl and she didn't incite anyone else to either. Rosie presumably posted on Twitter anyway, so she wasn't in hiding or anything.
User avatar
Raggamuffin
 
Posts: 38416
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:51 am

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Raggamuffin » Mon May 17, 2021 3:33 pm

drum wrote:'Rosie' was well known around Twitter long before RR started picking on her.


How did Riley pick on her exactly?
User avatar
Raggamuffin
 
Posts: 38416
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:51 am

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Raggamuffin » Mon May 17, 2021 3:34 pm

Grafenwalder wrote:I wonder what Rachel Riley had to say about the Israeli gang rapists a couple of years ago in Cyprus who returned home to a heroes welcome at Ben Gurion Airport dancing and chanting, "the Brit is a whore"?

https://www.timesofisrael.com/some-in-i ... gang-rape/


Did she say anything? If not, she's not obliged to is she?
User avatar
Raggamuffin
 
Posts: 38416
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:51 am

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Text » Mon May 17, 2021 6:35 pm

Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I haven't followed this, but anyone who abuses anyone on Twitter cannot blame anyone else for "inciting" them IMO. People are responsible for their own behaviour.

None of Rachel Riley's minions are blaming her, they were only too willing to pick on a 16 year old girl for their celebrity idol.
What Mike Sivier pointed out was that while Riley was quick to invoke protection for herself she didn't have an issue with setting the Twitter dogs on someone else.

Rachel Riley has a history of trying to set her trolls on other people while pretending she is the victim of online abuse. She is the next Katie Hopkins and should be treated with the same contempt.


Liked! :thumbsup:
BIB: Groundhog day! Where have we seen this exact line of argument before?
When the US capitol was stormed!

Trump stood there dog-whistling his head off, to an armed crowd, then watched them immediately rush up the steps of the capitol and smash their way in. His apologists said it wasn't the poor lamb's fault and he was not responsible for what the crowd did, and he did not expect the crowd whom he'd just fired up, to react the way they did.

People who have a large following on SM are called 'Influencers' and that is the official title of their career / hobby.
Maybe the same people who said Trump's words had zero influence on the proud boys & confederates who stormed that building are the same ones who'd say that the words or deeds of SM influencers have no um ... influence.
User avatar
Text
 
Posts: 23611
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:21 pm

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Cactus Jack » Mon May 17, 2021 7:46 pm

Text wrote:
Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I haven't followed this, but anyone who abuses anyone on Twitter cannot blame anyone else for "inciting" them IMO. People are responsible for their own behaviour.

None of Rachel Riley's minions are blaming her, they were only too willing to pick on a 16 year old girl for their celebrity idol.
What Mike Sivier pointed out was that while Riley was quick to invoke protection for herself she didn't have an issue with setting the Twitter dogs on someone else.

Rachel Riley has a history of trying to set her trolls on other people while pretending she is the victim of online abuse. She is the next Katie Hopkins and should be treated with the same contempt.


Liked! :thumbsup:
BIB: Groundhog day! Where have we seen this exact line of argument before?
When the US capitol was stormed!

Trump stood there dog-whistling his head off, to an armed crowd, then watched them immediately rush up the steps of the capitol and smash their way in. His apologists said it wasn't the poor lamb's fault and he was not responsible for what the crowd did, and he did not expect the crowd whom he'd just fired up, to react the way they did.

People who have a large following on SM are called 'Influencers' and that is the official title of their career / hobby.
Maybe the same people who said Trump's words had zero influence on the proud boys & confederates who stormed that building are the same ones who'd say that the words or deeds of SM influencers have no um ... influence.

It has been compared to the way organised criminals speak.

"I think Frankie needs to learn a lesson." Doesn't actually say the words "Kill Frankie" but the listeners are expected to know exactly what is being ordered.

If you read and listen to Michael Cohen's testimony he tells us this was exactly Trump's M.O.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
 
Posts: 17670
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 1:15 pm
Location: Round yer somewhere

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Text » Mon May 17, 2021 8:11 pm

Cactus Jack wrote:
Text wrote:
Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I haven't followed this, but anyone who abuses anyone on Twitter cannot blame anyone else for "inciting" them IMO. People are responsible for their own behaviour.

None of Rachel Riley's minions are blaming her, they were only too willing to pick on a 16 year old girl for their celebrity idol.
What Mike Sivier pointed out was that while Riley was quick to invoke protection for herself she didn't have an issue with setting the Twitter dogs on someone else.

Rachel Riley has a history of trying to set her trolls on other people while pretending she is the victim of online abuse. She is the next Katie Hopkins and should be treated with the same contempt.


Liked! :thumbsup:
BIB: Groundhog day! Where have we seen this exact line of argument before?
When the US capitol was stormed!

Trump stood there dog-whistling his head off, to an armed crowd, then watched them immediately rush up the steps of the capitol and smash their way in. His apologists said it wasn't the poor lamb's fault and he was not responsible for what the crowd did, and he did not expect the crowd whom he'd just fired up, to react the way they did.

People who have a large following on SM are called 'Influencers' and that is the official title of their career / hobby.
Maybe the same people who said Trump's words had zero influence on the proud boys & confederates who stormed that building are the same ones who'd say that the words or deeds of SM influencers have no um ... influence.

It has been compared to the way organised criminals speak.

"I think Frankie needs to learn a lesson." Doesn't actually say the words "Kill Frankie" but the listeners are expected to know exactly what is being ordered.

If you read and listen to Michael Cohen's testimony he tells us this was exactly Trump's M.O.

There was never this much trouble with lovely Carol Voderman, and she kept her politics to herself. :snooty:
To get back on topic I think the judge was right in this twitter dispute - and I hope all parties involved find closure & move on.
User avatar
Text
 
Posts: 23611
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:21 pm

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Raggamuffin » Mon May 17, 2021 8:14 pm

Cactus Jack wrote:
Text wrote:
Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I haven't followed this, but anyone who abuses anyone on Twitter cannot blame anyone else for "inciting" them IMO. People are responsible for their own behaviour.

None of Rachel Riley's minions are blaming her, they were only too willing to pick on a 16 year old girl for their celebrity idol.
What Mike Sivier pointed out was that while Riley was quick to invoke protection for herself she didn't have an issue with setting the Twitter dogs on someone else.

Rachel Riley has a history of trying to set her trolls on other people while pretending she is the victim of online abuse. She is the next Katie Hopkins and should be treated with the same contempt.


Liked! :thumbsup:
BIB: Groundhog day! Where have we seen this exact line of argument before?
When the US capitol was stormed!

Trump stood there dog-whistling his head off, to an armed crowd, then watched them immediately rush up the steps of the capitol and smash their way in. His apologists said it wasn't the poor lamb's fault and he was not responsible for what the crowd did, and he did not expect the crowd whom he'd just fired up, to react the way they did.

People who have a large following on SM are called 'Influencers' and that is the official title of their career / hobby.
Maybe the same people who said Trump's words had zero influence on the proud boys & confederates who stormed that building are the same ones who'd say that the words or deeds of SM influencers have no um ... influence.

It has been compared to the way organised criminals speak.

"I think Frankie needs to learn a lesson." Doesn't actually say the words "Kill Frankie" but the listeners are expected to know exactly what is being ordered.

If you read and listen to Michael Cohen's testimony he tells us this was exactly Trump's M.O.


Did Rachel Riley say that Rosie needs to learn a lesson?
User avatar
Raggamuffin
 
Posts: 38416
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:51 am

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Raggamuffin » Mon May 17, 2021 8:24 pm

Text wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:
Text wrote:
Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I haven't followed this, but anyone who abuses anyone on Twitter cannot blame anyone else for "inciting" them IMO. People are responsible for their own behaviour.

None of Rachel Riley's minions are blaming her, they were only too willing to pick on a 16 year old girl for their celebrity idol.
What Mike Sivier pointed out was that while Riley was quick to invoke protection for herself she didn't have an issue with setting the Twitter dogs on someone else.

Rachel Riley has a history of trying to set her trolls on other people while pretending she is the victim of online abuse. She is the next Katie Hopkins and should be treated with the same contempt.


Liked! :thumbsup:
BIB: Groundhog day! Where have we seen this exact line of argument before?
When the US capitol was stormed!

Trump stood there dog-whistling his head off, to an armed crowd, then watched them immediately rush up the steps of the capitol and smash their way in. His apologists said it wasn't the poor lamb's fault and he was not responsible for what the crowd did, and he did not expect the crowd whom he'd just fired up, to react the way they did.

People who have a large following on SM are called 'Influencers' and that is the official title of their career / hobby.
Maybe the same people who said Trump's words had zero influence on the proud boys & confederates who stormed that building are the same ones who'd say that the words or deeds of SM influencers have no um ... influence.

It has been compared to the way organised criminals speak.

"I think Frankie needs to learn a lesson." Doesn't actually say the words "Kill Frankie" but the listeners are expected to know exactly what is being ordered.

If you read and listen to Michael Cohen's testimony he tells us this was exactly Trump's M.O.

There was never this much trouble with lovely Carol Voderman, and she kept her politics to herself. :snooty:
To get back on topic I think the judge was right in this twitter dispute - and I hope all parties involved find closure & move on.



I don't think it's over yet - it could go to trial.
User avatar
Raggamuffin
 
Posts: 38416
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:51 am

Re: 'Countdown's Rachel Riley is a twitter troll' is NOT libel

Postby Grafenwalder » Mon May 17, 2021 9:30 pm

Text wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:
Text wrote:
Guest wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I haven't followed this, but anyone who abuses anyone on Twitter cannot blame anyone else for "inciting" them IMO. People are responsible for their own behaviour.

None of Rachel Riley's minions are blaming her, they were only too willing to pick on a 16 year old girl for their celebrity idol.
What Mike Sivier pointed out was that while Riley was quick to invoke protection for herself she didn't have an issue with setting the Twitter dogs on someone else.

Rachel Riley has a history of trying to set her trolls on other people while pretending she is the victim of online abuse. She is the next Katie Hopkins and should be treated with the same contempt.


Liked! :thumbsup:
BIB: Groundhog day! Where have we seen this exact line of argument before?
When the US capitol was stormed!

Trump stood there dog-whistling his head off, to an armed crowd, then watched them immediately rush up the steps of the capitol and smash their way in. His apologists said it wasn't the poor lamb's fault and he was not responsible for what the crowd did, and he did not expect the crowd whom he'd just fired up, to react the way they did.

People who have a large following on SM are called 'Influencers' and that is the official title of their career / hobby.
Maybe the same people who said Trump's words had zero influence on the proud boys & confederates who stormed that building are the same ones who'd say that the words or deeds of SM influencers have no um ... influence.

It has been compared to the way organised criminals speak.

"I think Frankie needs to learn a lesson." Doesn't actually say the words "Kill Frankie" but the listeners are expected to know exactly what is being ordered.

If you read and listen to Michael Cohen's testimony he tells us this was exactly Trump's M.O.

There was never this much trouble with lovely Carol Voderman, and she kept her politics to herself. :snooty:
To get back on topic I think the judge was right in this twitter dispute - and I hope all parties involved find closure & move on.

Here is the court judgment in full; https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2021/713.html
User avatar
Grafenwalder
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 11:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to News, Politics And Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests