←back to thread

630 points xbryanx | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
akudha ◴[] No.44532288[source]
This was depressing to read. Failures at so many levels.

1. Immediately after Horizon was rolled out, issues were reported. But ignored

2. Prosecutors didn't bother to verify if there is another explanation before accusing thousands of people of stealing? Isn't it common sense to pause for a second and think, "could we please double check the evidence? how can thousands of postal workers suddenly turn into thieves?"

3. local newspaper had published a photo of her and labeled her the “pregnant thief.” - of course, UK tabloids. Click baits and write whatever the fuck they want, no matter whose lives are destroyed

4. post office has said that it does not have the means to provide redress for that many people - so they have the means to falsely prosecute and destroy the lives of thousands of people, but they don't have the means to correct their blunders?

This happened more than a decade ago. Citizens are expected to do everything on time (pay taxes, renew drivers license...) or get fined/jailed, but the government can sit on their butt for 10 YEARS and do nothing about a blunder they caused?

What about Fujitsu? Why can't the government make Fujitsu pay for the destruction caused by their shitty software?

Jeez. This is just fucking nuts

replies(8): >>44532458 #>>44532620 #>>44532731 #>>44532787 #>>44533037 #>>44533826 #>>44535067 #>>44537287 #
dagmx ◴[] No.44532787[source]
I really wish someone had the political capital to do something about the tabloids. They’re really a detriment to society.
replies(4): >>44532998 #>>44533002 #>>44534851 #>>44537961 #
arrowsmith ◴[] No.44533002[source]
I don't like the tabloids either but what exactly do you propose we do? Are you sure it's a good idea to undermine the freedom of the press?

A government with the power to censor the tabloids is also a government with the power to censor the news outlets that you do like. I'd be careful about opening that can of worms.

replies(6): >>44533050 #>>44533134 #>>44533356 #>>44533535 #>>44533551 #>>44538509 #
cgriswald ◴[] No.44533551[source]
Civil defamation laws could equally be used to undermine freedom of the press. In any case, the 'can of worms' you are talking about was the state of affairs in the UK until 2009 and is currently the case in several US states and yet somehow we still have people in those states openly criticizing a sitting president.

Rather than throwing our hands in the air, maybe we could expect our governments to craft laws in such a way that we can punish people for willful lies resulting in death while still preserving our right to free speech and the press.

replies(1): >>44533906 #
arrowsmith ◴[] No.44533906[source]
The UK already has extremely strong defamation laws, to the point where we attract "libel tourism" - foreigners find dubious excuses to bring their libel cases to the UK courts so that they have an easier chance of winning.

Lots of people in my replies are telling me that I'm wrong, but no-one has yet answered my question: what specifically should the government do?

replies(1): >>44534597 #
1. cgriswald ◴[] No.44534597[source]
That’s because your question appears rhetorical. You had already come to the conclusion that governments couldn’t or shouldn’t do anything.

What could be done: (1) Stronger penalties, perhaps tied to proportionate burdens of proof. (2) Criminal penalties.

A weak burden of proof with mediocre penalties is just a cost of doing business.