I disagree with a lot of what Linehan says but I didn’t see his tweets as breaching the theshold for inciting violence. I think a threat needs to have the maker/sender of it claim that they, or those close to them, are credibly about to enact the violence.
The tweet I saw, not sure if it’s the one that got him in trouble, was similar to how people put “punch nazis” in their twitter bio. To me, that is non-specific and not a credible threat.
Edit: A better example might be the time actor Liam Neeson told an interviewer an anecdote about how he left his house armed with a club with the intention of committing a racially aggravated hate crime. For some reason he thought it would be a good promo for his new action film? At any rate, the way he described the specifics of what he intended to do seems like a clear example of inciting violence.
Neeson was judged not to have met the threshold for inciting violence despite describing in detail how he planned and attempted to carry out a racially motivated attack. In my opinion that’s a more specific incitement to violence than the Linehan tweet because it is specific and credible.
Yes, he throw in a few comments about how he regrets it and won’t do it again but we’re talking about the contents of a statement as opposed to the context.* I’m not convinced either situations should be considered incitement to violence but the Neeson one seems closer to satisfying the criteria for police intervention.
*The law would consider the statements in isolation, like I can’t go on a misogynistic/homophobic/racist rant and then add “just kidding” at the end to escape any repercussions.
It wasn’t really framed as a learning experience when he intially brought it up. For some reason he thought it would be an appropriate story to tell to sell his “hard man” credentials as promo for an upcoming action movie role.
Writing on his blog, Mr. Linehan said he was taken into police custody, searched and interviewed in relation to three posts he made on X in April, including one that read: “If a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent, abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls.”
…
Mr. Rowley defended the arrest in his statement, saying that the law “dictates that a threat to punch someone from a protected group could be an offense” and that “most reasonable people would agree that genuine threats of physical violence against an identified person or group should be acted upon by officers.”
In the 12 months that ended in March 2024, almost 4,800 hate crimes were recorded against transgender people, British police data shows, up from 2,800 hate crimes in the 12 months that ended in March 2021.
…
Mr. Linehan, 57, is set to go on trial on Thursday on separate charges of harassing an 18-year-old campaigner for transgender rights, accusations he denies.
Linehan made three separate threats, is already on trial for harassing a trans-rights activist, and is a known anti-trans activist - the context is important, it’s not like this is being overblown, a bigot is advocating for violence against a minority group he campaigns against.
Neeson wasn’t inciting violence though was he? He wasn’t encouraging others to be violent. He was describing an incident in his past which he went on to describe how this behaviour filled him with shame and remorse. It was literally the opposite of inciting violence.
I disagree with a lot of what Linehan says but I didn’t see his tweets as breaching the theshold for inciting violence. I think a threat needs to have the maker/sender of it claim that they, or those close to them, are credibly about to enact the violence.
The tweet I saw, not sure if it’s the one that got him in trouble, was similar to how people put “punch nazis” in their twitter bio. To me, that is non-specific and not a credible threat.
Edit: A better example might be the time actor Liam Neeson told an interviewer an anecdote about how he left his house armed with a club with the intention of committing a racially aggravated hate crime. For some reason he thought it would be a good promo for his new action film? At any rate, the way he described the specifics of what he intended to do seems like a clear example of inciting violence.
deleted by creator
Neeson was judged not to have met the threshold for inciting violence despite describing in detail how he planned and attempted to carry out a racially motivated attack. In my opinion that’s a more specific incitement to violence than the Linehan tweet because it is specific and credible.
Yes, he throw in a few comments about how he regrets it and won’t do it again but we’re talking about the contents of a statement as opposed to the context.* I’m not convinced either situations should be considered incitement to violence but the Neeson one seems closer to satisfying the criteria for police intervention.
*The law would consider the statements in isolation, like I can’t go on a misogynistic/homophobic/racist rant and then add “just kidding” at the end to escape any repercussions.
deleted by creator
It wasn’t really framed as a learning experience when he intially brought it up. For some reason he thought it would be an appropriate story to tell to sell his “hard man” credentials as promo for an upcoming action movie role.
Linehan made three separate threats, is already on trial for harassing a trans-rights activist, and is a known anti-trans activist - the context is important, it’s not like this is being overblown, a bigot is advocating for violence against a minority group he campaigns against.
Neeson wasn’t inciting violence though was he? He wasn’t encouraging others to be violent. He was describing an incident in his past which he went on to describe how this behaviour filled him with shame and remorse. It was literally the opposite of inciting violence.