paris brown quits

sungod

i have no idea, or interest in, what she posted as a kid and even less idea why the police are investigating what she posted as a kid

nor am i keen on the position that she'll no longer be taking up or it's grown up equivalents even existing in the first place

but i find it sad that a child's actions online can now result in their later life being soundly screwed because some sections of the media embark on a witch hunt

fortunately, my childhood exploits, of which there were many, predated social networking and i was able to enjoy the luxury of being a child, learning from my mistakes and not spending the rest of my life saddled with them

CambsNewbie

On her Twitter account she called homosexuals fags, immigrants (legal or not) illegals and called travellers pikys. She also boasted of her sex life, getting drunk and of wanting to cut someone up!

She may claim that she did these things when younger but she is only 17 now and posted these things when 14-16 so only a year or two ago.

Certainly not the language that someone who wants to be a Youth PCC should be saying. And in my opinion not the sort of person who should be getting paid £15k of taxpayers money.

It's good that she has resigned, but the decision shouldn't have been hers. The PCC should have dismissed her as soon as the facts came out.

Hopefully this might make people and especially teenages think about what they are putting online in all kinds of social media.

pipipi

I'm a teacher. I am trying to tell kids that the stuff that they do online matters, especially when it leaves a trace. And someone who wants to go and look up all your history can find it there :shock:

Imagine if all the conversations you had down the pub had been recorded :shock: , and then replayed to your wife/employer/parents etc. I think most of would say that we were relaxing, didn't know we were being recorded, had too much to drink etc.

Sadly lots of kids are posting lots of immediate comments without really thinking about the longer implications.

And from an intellect point of view (not just me) if it's immediate reaction then it's superficial , not really deep thinking about things. But there are plenty of serious programs, and I'd include BBC Breakfast 'news' here, that love to go and shove a microphone in someone's face hoping for something succint and contraversial to jump out...

pipipi

and how come the PCC hadn't done a background check?????

If they can't do one before appointing then who else are they letting in!

VTech

Its not just kids. This forum is full of people condoning illegal activity and when questioned they come together and fight a lost cause.

I feel for the kid, whatever she wrote, she doesnt deserve a countrywide humiliation, her life will be in tatters and she simply doesnt deserve that.

Stupid, yes.
Idiotic, yes.
In need of public execution, NO !!!

thegreatdivide

VTech wrote:

Its not just kids. This forum is full of people condoning illegal activity and when questioned they come together and fight a lost cause.

I feel for the kid, whatever she wrote, she doesnt deserve a countrywide humiliation, her life will be in tatters and she simply doesnt deserve that.

Stupid, yes.
Idiotic, yes.
In need of public execution, NO !!!

Sorry but what the hell does this mean?

VTech

Its about the topic.
A girl made a stupid mistake that she obviously regrets and is being severely punished for it (I think the punishment she is getting is way to much for the crime).
I posted on this forum about the fact that someone was selling counterfeit goods and explained that at a later date it could haunt people who suggested that it wasnt illegal and more so that it should be fine as they are made int he same places but that wasnt true and when I suggested that people should be careful as they are indeed making themselves accessories to an illegal activity I was again mocked but this whole topic proves that on the net you cant hide from what you write.

sungod

CambsNewbie wrote:

On her Twitter account she called homosexuals fags, immigrants (legal or not) illegals and called travellers pikys. She also boasted of her sex life, getting drunk and of wanting to cut someone up!

She may claim that she did these things when younger but she is only 17 now and posted these things when 14-16 so only a year or two ago.

Certainly not the language that someone who wants to be a Youth PCC should be saying. And in my opinion not the sort of person who should be getting paid £15k of taxpayers money.

It's good that she has resigned, but the decision shouldn't have been hers. The PCC should have dismissed her as soon as the facts came out.

Hopefully this might make people and especially teenages think about what they are putting online in all kinds of social media.

ah, that's pretty offensive i agree

but you say she 'may claim that she did these things when youngers', no, she posted online

it's a matter of fact when she did it, unless you think someone has tampered with system timestamps, and according to the reports that was when she was a kid

if at the time police had investigated then her identity would have been protected, because she was a kid

should every kid who makes obnoxious statements now be forever barred? or is that only reserved for the few who catch the attention of the press when they are short of a story?

to me she was singled out, judged and executed for something the vast majority will get away with

either everyone should be treated that way, or none should

VTech

sungod wrote:

CambsNewbie wrote:

On her Twitter account she called homosexuals fags, immigrants (legal or not) illegals and called travellers pikys. She also boasted of her sex life, getting drunk and of wanting to cut someone up!

She may claim that she did these things when younger but she is only 17 now and posted these things when 14-16 so only a year or two ago.

Certainly not the language that someone who wants to be a Youth PCC should be saying. And in my opinion not the sort of person who should be getting paid £15k of taxpayers money.

It's good that she has resigned, but the decision shouldn't have been hers. The PCC should have dismissed her as soon as the facts came out.

Hopefully this might make people and especially teenages think about what they are putting online in all kinds of social media.

ah, that's pretty offensive i agree

but you say she 'may claim that she did these things when youngers', no, she posted online

it's a matter of fact when she did it, unless you think someone has tampered with system timestamps, and according to the reports that was when she was a kid

if at the time police had investigated then her identity would have been protected, because she was a kid

should every kid who makes obnoxious statements now be forever barred? or is that only reserved for the few who catch the attention of the press when they are short of a story?

to me she was singled out, judged and executed for something the vast majority will get away with

either everyone should be treated that way, or none should

Perfectly summed up.

CambsNewbie

sungod wrote:

CambsNewbie wrote:

On her Twitter account she called homosexuals fags, immigrants (legal or not) illegals and called travellers pikys. She also boasted of her sex life, getting drunk and of wanting to cut someone up!

She may claim that she did these things when younger but she is only 17 now and posted these things when 14-16 so only a year or two ago.

Certainly not the language that someone who wants to be a Youth PCC should be saying. And in my opinion not the sort of person who should be getting paid £15k of taxpayers money.

It's good that she has resigned, but the decision shouldn't have been hers. The PCC should have dismissed her as soon as the facts came out.

Hopefully this might make people and especially teenages think about what they are putting online in all kinds of social media.

ah, that's pretty offensive i agree

but you say she 'may claim that she did these things when youngers', no, she posted online

it's a matter of fact when she did it, unless you think someone has tampered with system timestamps, and according to the reports that was when she was a kid

if at the time police had investigated then her identity would have been protected, because she was a kid

should every kid who makes obnoxious statements now be forever barred? or is that only reserved for the few who catch the attention of the press when they are short of a story?

to me she was singled out, judged and executed for something the vast majority will get away with

either everyone should be treated that way, or none should

I don't think so was singled out for what she did, anyone going into the public eye and going onto a wage paid by taxpayers must expect their history to be investigated and nowadays that means online as well. Having seen her stand up and admit what she has done and apologise I do think good on you, that takes balls (so to speak!). Hopefully she can put this behind her, learn from it and move on.

However I still think due to the particular role she was employed in she had no choice but to resign.

As for the police action, my understanding is that CPS will only consider prosecuting for something that is GROSSLY offensive, not merely offensive.

Mikey23

My nurse friend tells that colleagues have been dismissed because of what they posted on FB... I know that one of my former bosses was everyone's 'friend' so that he could check up on those pulling a sicky and also posting confidential information and several disciplinaries resulted... Fact of life I guess

But I blame thatcher myself, so I'm pleased she's dead and i will be out rioting on the streets tonight...
(Note to the intelligence services... That was a weak attempt at humour)

sungod

CambsNewbie i understand what you're saying, but i'm not questioning investigating adult acts

here they are taking the actions of a kid and then using them to bring down a (still young) adult for their own ends

the law rightly sets a different standard of responsibility for children, and if they are subject to investigation then there are different processes, protections and potential outcomes compared to investigation of similar acts performed by an adult

in this case her acts as a child are being used to persecute her as an adult, to me that's wrong

people mature at different rates and different ages, as a society we used to accept that, but now it seems everything is in scope

when does it stop? if an 8 year old insults and hits another child, is it just if those acts are used to disqualify them from getting a job as an adult by exposing them in the press as a violent child abuser?

as a society we draw legal lines according to age, we either stick to those lines or every childhood act becomes fair game

VTech

sungod, im with you.
It is also a criminal offence to mention and link children to crimes or adults to crimes as a child so how is this happening ?
The police are informing the media through the back door on a daily basis these days, something needs fixing.

CambsNewbie

But she's only 17 now and she made these comments when 14-16 so only recently in the whole scheme of things.

Normally when the police investigate a child it's done privately to protect the child, but she made herself a public figure by applying for and getting a public job. The police haven't started an investigation then It became public, the information was out there and the police have said they will investigate in response to what was already public knowledge.

VTech

On the BBC this morning her boss had said that whilst she supported Paris, they could not have checked up on her as they have no right to check on offences as a child (under 16) and in fact there were no offences charged anyway.
It was only after the police and press were sent links to her feeds that everyone became aware.
She was probably screwed over by a friend.

Its shocking, she could have been a great role model to tell young kids the dangers of what they say and do can haunt them in later life.

cornerblock

VTech wrote:

Its shocking, she could have been a great role model to tell young kids the dangers of what they say and do can haunt them in later life.

Not shocking at all really, just instead of being a "a great role model" to the kids she's now a great example.

VTech

I wanted to argue with your reply but can't, your dead right.

I still feel sorry for her though.

ballysmate

pipipi wrote:

I'm a teacher. I am trying to tell kids that the stuff that they do online matters, especially when it leaves a trace. And someone who wants to go and look up all your history can find it there :shock:

Imagine if all the conversations you had down the pub had been recorded :shock: , and then replayed to your wife/employer/parents etc. I think most of would say that we were relaxing, didn't know we were being recorded, had too much to drink etc.

Sadly lots of kids are posting lots of immediate comments without really thinking about the longer implications.

And from an intellect point of view (not just me) if it's immediate reaction then it's superficial , not really deep thinking about things. But there are plenty of serious programs, and I'd include BBC Breakfast 'news' here, that love to go and shove a microphone in someone's face hoping for something succint and contraversial to jump out...

Obviously I don't know the girl, but she is perhaps someone the kids could have related to. Sounds like it.
I have drummed into my kids, they would say nagged, that they should only upload stuff they would feel comfortable having the world see. Any prospective employer can search for them on social media, and it's no good them being sat there in a nice suit, if they are shown throwing up in the street on the internet, for example. I don't believe that a search wasn't done prior to her being offered the job. Nothing to do with ckecking criminal records.
As regards thrusting a microphone into someone's face, couldn't agree more. Time after time you see some poor soul, who has lost a family member, asked how they feel. FFS, how do you think they feel.

herb71

I don't feel sorry for her at all. At the age she made the tweets she was between 14 and 16. More than old enough to know better and to suffer the consequences of her actions.

cornerblock

VTech wrote:

I wanted to argue with your reply but can't, your dead right.

I still feel sorry for her though.

I'd like to think that if she is of the right character, as she claims, it could still be the making of her. Harsh lessons at a young age can have a positive effect.

Frank the tank

Cornerblock wrote:

VTech wrote:

I wanted to argue with your reply but can't, your dead right.

I still feel sorry for her though.

I'd like to think that if she is of the right character, as she claims, it could still be the making of her. Harsh lessons at a young age can have a positive effect.

The woman who ultimately employed her said on this evenings news that she explicitly asked Paris Brown as a final question (I can't remember exactly TBH) Is there anything you haven't told us that could cause embarrassment (or come back to bite your @rse basically) and PB replied No.

the playing mantis

what she said wasnt really that bad, its the kind of language lots of people and especially youth say amongst themselves.

however if you hope to have any sort of public position you shouldnt be so stupid to air those views widely, as you will have a non story thats really not importtant becoming a media storm in the same way as paulo di canio, phone hacking, mps expenses etc are/were

CambsNewbie

the playing mantis wrote:

what she said wasnt really that bad, its the kind of language lots of people and especially youth say amongst themselves.

however if you hope to have any sort of public position you shouldnt be so stupid to air those views widely, as you will have a non story thats really not importtant becoming a media storm in the same way as paulo di canio, phone hacking, mps expenses etc are/were

Have to disagree with you. Using the word fag for homosexuals is the same as using the N word for black people, calling all immigrants illegals is demeaning to those entitled to be here and if you ask a traveller what they think of the word pikey you'd better be on your bike as you say it!

Just because people and youths say it amongst themselves doesn't make it alright.

ooermissus

This will be very good for those bred for power who know, from an early age, that they need to avoid leaving behind evidence that will compromise them. David Cameron, for example, is said to have left Oxford parties before they got messy or when the drugs came out. Not so good for everyone else - apart from the media of course.

ballysmate

Strange one really. She was brought in because she could empathise with the young, but had to resign because she spoke their language.
I suppose a public body couldn't be seen to condone such language in this day and age.

imposter2.0

She should have been fired purely on the strength of her appallingly-bad hair style.

VTech

Imposter wrote:

She should have been fired purely on the strength of her appallingly-bad hair style.

I can't believe that I actually agree with you on something

herb71

Ballysmate wrote:

Strange one really. She was brought in because she could empathise with the young, but had to resign because she spoke their language.
I suppose a public body couldn't be seen to condone such language in this day and age.

I don't think she did speak their language. I think the vast majority of young people are better than we often believe. Her tweets show her to be a vile, ignorant individual, not representative of most of our youth.

ballysmate

Herb71 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

Strange one really. She was brought in because she could empathise with the young, but had to resign because she spoke their language.
I suppose a public body couldn't be seen to condone such language in this day and age.

I don't think she did speak their language. I think the vast majority of young people are better than we often believe. Her tweets show her to be a vile, ignorant individual, not representative of most of our youth.

Her role wasn't to reach the ones that are better than we think. She was to reach the ones that are every bit as bad as we believe.

herb71

Ballysmate wrote:

Herb71 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

Strange one really. She was brought in because she could empathise with the young, but had to resign because she spoke their language.
I suppose a public body couldn't be seen to condone such language in this day and age.

I don't think she did speak their language. I think the vast majority of young people are better than we often believe. Her tweets show her to be a vile, ignorant individual, not representative of most of our youth.

Her role wasn't to reach the ones that are better than we think. She was to reach the ones that are every bit as bad as we believe.

And do you think she could have done that? I very much doubt it. Her role was a gimmick, nothing more.

ballysmate

Herb71 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

Herb71 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

Strange one really. She was brought in because she could empathise with the young, but had to resign because she spoke their language.
I suppose a public body couldn't be seen to condone such language in this day and age.

I don't think she did speak their language. I think the vast majority of young people are better than we often believe. Her tweets show her to be a vile, ignorant individual, not representative of most of our youth.

Her role wasn't to reach the ones that are better than we think. She was to reach the ones that are every bit as bad as we believe.

And do you think she could have done that? I very much doubt it. Her role was a gimmick, nothing more.

No I don't think she could. But I was referring to why she lost her job, not her ability or her chances of doing a good job.