It was announced by Justice secretary Chris Grayling this week that ‘internet Trolls’ may face up to 2 years behind bars for simply expressing themselves online after the Madeley family kicked off about their daughter being trolled online but what is the truth behind this law?
Firstly – we have to understand the fact that the Madeley family are upper-class, staunch conservative voters. This is a family that believes in ‘book clubs’, ‘wine clubs’ and they all seem to speak with a forked middle-class tone that is not commonly accepted in most parts of our country.
Is it by no coincidence that this new Anti-Trolling bill,’Chloe’s Law’ has come into fruition seeing as both Richard Madeley and Chris Grayling went to school together.
According to statements by Richard Madeley and his semi-attractive daughter Chloe, they were both threatened with ‘rape-threats’ online and subjected to a torrent of abuse by anonymous Twitter accounts which led them to both fearing for their safety which presumably is when Madeley got onto the phone to his old friend Grayling and sought advice.
Though this is not the first time Madeley sought advice with the Justice department as when in 2009 Chloe crashed her car after drunk driving in North London – potentially she could have killed somebody in both a violent and horrific manner yet she was slapped very firmly around the backside with a simple disqualification for 20 months!
So let’s get this straight – a new law being passed through parliament is to be named after a convicted drunk driver who nearly killed somebody a few years ago?
Now, Chloe who is famous for nothing other than being the daughter of a television presenting couple is seemingly living off the back of her mother and father. Indeed Miss Madeley has took to an obsessional fitness and well being exercise lifestyle like any other semi-attractive woman of her age but rather callously and conspicuously her father Richard has popped her a few notes to open up an attractive new website flogging crap at extortionate prices – ‘Fitness Fondue‘ as it’s called.
So either Richard Madeley has made a very large and handsome donation to the Conservative Party for a new law to be named after his fame hungry daughter or pigs are literally flying because to me an average, common and hard-working British man, the first allegation seems to be the most likely in this given situation.
Now back in the day somehow I ended up seeing a bit of Richard & Judy on the television like we all did, they were both publicly loved and respected by millions but it seems in recent years they have made a complete fall from grace. I personally agree with Judy’s comments on Loose Women the other week however I believe she made them purposely to strike up a huge and frenzied media storm to put the Madeley family back on the map – is that not what trolls do?
So given that sentiment, Judy Finnegan (as she calls herself) is indeed a troll by her own definition, her remarks on Loose Women provoked a lot of anger and reaction – something that the trolls who had fun with her daughter also did. This leaves us in a very hypocritical and seemingly perverse situation in the sense that actually, under Chloe’s Law we should see the arrest of Judy for her remarks.
Whilst people may question the ‘morality’ of jokingly threaten to rape or murder somebody online you also have to see the funny side to it. Trolls don’t threaten to rape and murder because they intend on carrying out those remarks, they don’t even threaten at all – they provoke and express, just in the same way that Judy Finnegan did on Loose Women. Should we jail people for two years because they express themselves? No.
Now, I publicly asked Chloe Madeley a few questions on Twitter just the other week to which she blocked me and then started to childishly like the Left-Wing perverts remarks, (the people who stalk me because of my political convictions) below my questions which to my mind is akin to treachery to one’s country.
So I will request that Madeley will unblock me so I can continue to conduct my investigation and peacefully ask a number of questions which will prove vital in the war for freedom of speech. She is more than welcome to choose to ignore my demands but without answers we can not truly begin to grasp tightly a picture of what has actually occurred here and instead we will be free to jump to conclusions of bribery, molestation and buggery as I did in my general synopsis above.
Failing that then I suggest we all go and get drunk, crash our cars and attempt to kill people before ripping our clothes off for lads magazines and then just maybe we will be lucky enough to have a piece of parliamentary legislation named after us.
Either way – the whole thing stinks of shit and I want answers.