SD v SeoulPig 2020 Crim 18: Difference between revisions
From SimDemocracy Archives
No edit summary |
Categorized |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Case Law]] | [[Category:Case Law|2020-11-25]] [[Category:Criminal Cases|2020-11-25]] [[Category:Court Cases from 2020|2020-11-25]] | ||
[[Category: Case Law Concerning Hate Speech]] | [[Category: Case Law Concerning Hate Speech]] | ||
= SD v SeoulPig 2020 Crim 18= | = SD v SeoulPig 2020 Crim 18= | ||
Latest revision as of 03:11, 26 March 2025
SD v SeoulPig 2020 Crim 18
| Date of judgment | 25th November 2020 |
|---|---|
| Judge | Justice TheMainCharacter |
| Charges | 2 charges of Hate Speech (Article 72b of the Criminal Code) |
| Verdict | Guilty of 2 charges of Hate Speech |
| Sentence | 1 month ban |
| Applicable persuasive precedent |
JUDGMENT by Justice TheMainCharacter
Introduction
[1]. The defendant is charged with 2 counts of hate speech, both in relation to the use of the word "retard" to refer to an individual.
Evaluation of the relevant facts and law
[2]. There are two parts of the charge necessary to be proven as per §1.2 of Article 72b of the Criminal Code; that a slur was used, and that it was directed at someone.
[3]. As established in krystiancbarrie, the word retard is an insult generally applied to people with disabilities, and therefore a slur.
[4]. In both instances, it is evident that the slur is directed at a person.
Verdict
[5]. The accused is found guilty of two counts of hate speech and is sentenced to a ban of one month.
