The Warwick drama continues

I do not care what you think of me. What is of outmost concern is yor behaviour towards other people and making dangerous statements like this one. How dare you justify rape? Even if somsone makes rape jokes on a constant basis this is a result of a hidden desire or of previous actions.Read some psychology. Again, I wonder if your mother is proud of you reading comments like this one. You should not be allowed on this forum. And mocking somsone because they are trying to inform this community that rape is no joke is beyond me. You've been reported.

Isn’t that the problem. People should be able to have private conversations. I bet everybody here has said something in a private chat that they’d rather not be heard in public.

Isn’t that the problem. People should be able to have private conversations. I bet everybody here has said something in a private chat that they’d rather not be heard in public.

No they are jokes.Not very high brow ones but still jokes.Being offensive is not yet a crime.Extensive experience of rape? Listen to yourself.The police found no crime was committed.All that has happened here is that some immature boys have posted offensive jokes on a chat.They didn't threaten anyone.They didn't rape anyone.They had no intention of raping anyone.I've heard worse jokes about Madeline McCann.Is everyone who jokes about that now a potential child abductor? You are being ridiculous.Its ok to joke about offensive things.
The police and the uni clearly agreed as they were coming back until Twitter outrage erupted.

Being grossly offensive via means of internet messaging, broadcasting, post, publishing or telephone calls are crimes.
But it is for the police, cps and courts to enforce the law.
I don't agree with warwick disciplining those vile jerks with suspensions.

But I'm not a warwick student and didn't agree with warwick's decision to permit the leader of britain first to visit their premises for an event organised by a campus student society.

Chillax guys, the boys decided not to return to warwick.

Well maybe it shouldn't be.A part of free speech is freedom to offend.If you are not free to offend then you are limited in your speech and hence do not have free speech.I don't know about you but I'd like to not live in a police state which police's everyone's speech.That includes not no- platforming controversial speakers.And if as you say it is a crime then why was nobody charged? Clearly they couldn't find anything to charge them over that's why the uni dealt with it.

...And if as you say it is a crime then why was nobody charged? Clearly they couldn't find anything to charge them over that's why the uni dealt with it.

The CPS apply a two-part test when making a decision to prosecute which in simple terms is a) is there a reasonable chance of a conviction and b) is it in the public interest to pursue a conviction. It follows that what might easily be a 'crime' isn't automatically acted on. Given that there was a documented discussion in which raping named students was being promoted by the participants I'm sure technically this could have made it to court on some charge or other.

Where was it promoted exactly?

Amongst the participants in the discussion 'we should', 'you should' or whatever. It easily fits the description of 'incitement'.

Was this where he discussed raping 100 women in one night? Hardly realistic even for an army of men.Context is everything.When I say I'm going to kill my brother.It doesn't mean I'm actually making a threat on his life.It means he's pissed me off.I don't think anyone would seriously argue this guy was actually planning to rape anyone.

Specific female students were identified in the discussion as potential targets for rape, that fact isn't going away. You shouldn't say "I'm going to kill X" about any X if you're not confident that they wouldn't interpret it literally or be offended. Why? Because when you say something that is a face-value threat then it might just be received as a face-value threat. Besides what kind of person talks about raping their relatives or friends, let alone strangers? Have you ever said you're going to rape your brother? Maybe you have but that's on you. Women, who are routinely vulnerable to being raped by men, can't be so dismissive of 'banter' about rape as the men who indulged in it, maybe you don't understand that.

But generally I am confident they won't interpret it literally because I know they are not stupid.I have actually heard people say " I'd like to rape him/ her". It doesn't mean that they want to rape anyone just that they'd like to screw them.And anyway you say they were threatening rape but if so its the most ineffective threat ever.They were literally in a private chat.By their thoughts there was no way the girl/ girls would ever hear about it.Generally for a threat to be effective the person you are threatening has to at least know about it.If these guys had had their way they wouldn't have known.Therefore it wasn't a threat.

As for being a target..... Well all I will say is that real rapists don't go bragging about their " targets". You would have to be really stupid to put potential rape targets on WhatsApp for the police to find.The only reason you would do that is if you were a) extremely stupid
Or b) have no intention of raping anyone.And were in actual fact joking.
The idea that they were actually making plans to go out and rape women just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.The idea that they were threatening anyone also doesn't hold water.Doubtless this is why they were not charged with anything.You can't really prove they are guilty of anything other than jokes in bad taste.But there is something called dark humour.

You shouldn't say "I'm going to kill X" about any X if you're not confident that they wouldn't interpret it literally or be offended.

So your proposition is that no-one should say anything offensive about anyone, even if they're not the target audience for the comment, and even if there's no reason at all to expect that they might see it?

That is completely ridiculous.