City Council Tells 'Dumbest Criminal' To Stop Posting So Much Evidence To YouTube

from the give-the-cops-a-challenge,-man dept

Thu, May 22nd 2008 6:48am — Mike Masnick

We've been mocking various attempts to get laws passed that would make it illegal for criminals to post evidence of their crimes on YouTube. This makes absolutely no sense -- as you're basically telling criminals "stop giving us the evidence we need to convict you." If the criminals are so dumb as to hand over such evidence, shouldn't the police and gov't officials be happy about it? Now, in a rather extreme example of this, the city council for Leeds, in the UK, has banned a man they refer to as one of the city's "dumbest criminals" from posting any more evidence to YouTube. In fact, the City Council even seems to recognize how helpful the guy has been: "He has handed us the evidence against him on a plate. In the last three years, we have seen a 32 per cent reduction in crime in Leeds. If more criminals were as obliging, the city would be even safer." So why would you ban him from uploading such evidence?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: bans, criminals, evidence, leeds, uk, videos, youtube

19 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

PaulT (profile), 22 May 2008 @ 7:14am

Interesting.... Just as you say, the order is not "stop committing crimes" but "stop posting evidence of your crimes into the public arena so we can use it against you with no additional effort". Maybe the police are bored and need something to do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alex, 22 May 2008 @ 7:36am

Probably because the government realises that if people are uploading videos of crimes to youtube, then youtube is probably the reason they're committing the crimes. I mean, the attention they get for it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 22 May 2008 @ 7:57am
  
  Re:
  Probably because the government realises that if people are uploading videos of crimes to youtube, then youtube is probably the reason they're committing the crimes. I mean, the attention they get for it
  
  So, as long as the criminal is getting "attention", it must be a bad thing? This guy wants attention, and the legal system is giving it to him. Period. Why is this so much different than the news, other than no work has to go into getting the information, the guy is essentially turning himself in. Motivation behind self incrimination doesn't matter so long as it's not coerced, so why should we stop him?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Evil Mike, 22 May 2008 @ 8:32am
    
    Re: Re: Tards
    If the person is already a criminal (ie Law Breaker) why the hell would they even deign to notice a law forbidding the posting of incriminating evidence online?
    
    Which side of these two (criminal/law-maker) is more ignorant, retarded, or just plain lacking in logical reasoning?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 23 May 2008 @ 9:23am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Tards
      It doesn't matter if a law-breaker ignores a ban on incriminating himself, actively discouraging him from incriminating himself is dumb.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
yeah, 22 May 2008 @ 7:59am

yeah
I agree with Alex. Its like girls gone wild. yes they are tramps, but sans the cameras, they wouldn't be flashing.

Don't give these idiots a stage.

On the other hand, being able to nail them for multiple crimes gets you more plea bargains, which is guilty verdicts, and greases the skids of the courts.

It most likely wont change anybody's life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 22 May 2008 @ 8:14am
  
  Re: yeah
  No, the stage is good. These kinds of people would be career/petty criminals anyway (note that drugs and theft seem to be the main crimes this guy's committing, not just the driving offences uploaded to YouTube). If they're stupid enough to make a public record of their crimes to begin with, let them and get them off the street ASAP.
  
  @Alex: no. Don't blame the technology. I'm from the UK, I've known a lot of idiots like this in the past (pre- and post-internet). It's the localised culture of the scum who populate council estates and slums, not the internet, that creates this kind of crime and criminal. As with many stories in the last couple of days, don't confuse the increased visibility of a type of crime with increased incidents of it happening.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 May 2008 @ 9:26am
  
  Re: yeah
  Nah, the girls would still find a way of flaunting themselves, you just wouldn't have it recorded on tape. Same with criminals: no one commits a crime solely to post a video about it; you commit a crime because you want to commit the crime, and getting 'fame' is just gravy. Don't discourage that, as it helps you get them for the actual crime.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nobody, 22 May 2008 @ 8:10am

Atleast...
Atleast they make good video's!!! Still, I think it's like Paul say's, the cops were afriad of something else doing their job for them...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast, 22 May 2008 @ 8:28am

Maybe they are afraid of being outsourced to a call center overseas... heh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Come on, 22 May 2008 @ 8:57am

how bout forget the ban, and put this guy in jail, and then guess what... he cant upload these videos anymore. Kind of killing two birds with one stone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SuperSparky, 22 May 2008 @ 9:05am

Keeps postiing???
Typical UK solution to crime.

Why is this guy not in prison? Do they just keep slapping him on the wrist (in typical British fashion) and let him go?

Learn the concept of "punishment before rehabilitation". Maybe if he was actually punished for his crimes, he just might reconsider doing them again. Also, the more he does, the more severe the punishment.

Typical, make a law and expecting a law-breaker to keep it. Now I know why my Grandmother emigrated from that place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
freakengine, 22 May 2008 @ 9:36am

Wow...
I smell a union. I can foresee the day when the police unions hire people to commit crimes so they can continue to employ what are essentially legions of roving tax collectors.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ben, 22 May 2008 @ 10:43am

Getting Attention is an issue
When I was in high school my friends and I would pull big mischievous stunts (rearranging a teachers class room after hours - we climbed through the window) partly for the attention we'd get at school the next week.

So yes, I think part of the reason the city would want to ban these actions is so that other people don't get ideas... and so the criminal doesn't get his kicks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chronno S. Trigger, 22 May 2008 @ 10:53am
  
  Re: Getting Attention is an issue
  You put your stunts on youtube?
  
  I know I didn't. I pulled my stunts to get a laugh from my friends. Let's make a law banning friends.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
TravisO, 22 May 2008 @ 10:55am

So what's his YouTube user account?
I won't lie, now I want to see his videos. Not because I want to see crime, but to see how outrageously obvious the acts appear to be illegal or not.

Did he break into people's house and rob them on video? Did he even wear a mask? Did he beat somebody up on video?

I guess my want to see them adds fuel to this imaginary fire the government wants to put out. But really, I just want the whole story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nate, 22 May 2008 @ 11:02am

I am sure this guy was just doing stupid pranks and recording them. Maybe they think if he doesn't have an audience, he won't do stupid stuff to begin with. But, on the other hand, there are many other video hosting sites out there, so I doubt it will effectively do anything. Plus, all he needs to do is set up a Youtube account at a different IP address with a different name and he will be back online. Stupid criminals, stupid government officials...

http://www.custompcmax.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr. Joke Killer, 22 May 2008 @ 1:05pm

This is soo bad, even I don't try to joke about it....
This sounds like, "Hey, here's another law to break so we can charge you with more crimes."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 May 2008 @ 2:10pm

"He has handed us the evidence against him on a plate. In the last three years, we have seen a 32 per cent reduction in crime in Leeds. If more criminals were as obliging, the city would be even safer." So why would you ban him from uploading such evidence?

Why? Because the government lives on fear and when the crime rate goes down people are less fearful. And if criminals post evidence of their crimes on the net it might make some people wonder just how much money the police really need to catch them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]