I wonder what further punishment he wanted. (Genuinely).
>Jahmal Howlett-Mundle was playing for Sheppey United in August 2021 when Ayokunle Odedoyin of Tower Hamlets FC used abusive language towards him.
>Odedoyin, 32, had been found guilty at Bexley Magistrates’ Court in June and was sentenced on Wednesday.
>Mr Howlett-Mundle said: “I don’t think justice has been done.”
>Odedoyin was told he must complete 120 hours of unpaid work, and told to pay £1,120 in compensation and court costs.
>Speaking to BBC South East, Mr Howlett-Mundle said: “I don’t think it’s going to deter people in the future from being homophobic.
>”With short sentences like this how are people supposed to understand that there’s a lot of pain and suffering that does happen to people like myself and other active LGBTQ+ football players.”
I wonder what kind of punishment he’d think would be acceptable.
120 hours and £1120 seems like a pretty good deterrent to me. I’d be interested to know what was said that was unpleasant enough to attract such a punishment/fine, but seemingly not offensive enough to lead to further confrontation on the pitch.
I assume the offender knew that the victim was bisexual? Is that a prerequisite for a charge of ‘threatening or abusive or insulting words or behaviour to cause harassment, alarm or distress’? Shouting ‘get up, yer fackin poof’ at an opponent rolling around on the floor was pretty standard until relatively recently: basically an accusation of a perceived lack of manly ruggedness rather than a disparaging comment on actual sexuality.
…but given the sentence I’m guessing (hoping) is was a bit stronger than this!
As much as I hate homophobia, I don’t think the courts should be there to enforce politeness or particular beliefs. As much as it might be unpalatable, the law shouldn’t dictate what someone can or can’t believe or express to believe. Imagine if the wrong sort of government comes to power and is able to use the precedent to ban other sorts of things.
I can’t believe just saying something can give you a court case. Free speech is dead.
Freedom of speech does not include freedom to harm people.
Causing distress is simply wrong.
6 comments
I wonder what further punishment he wanted. (Genuinely).
>Jahmal Howlett-Mundle was playing for Sheppey United in August 2021 when Ayokunle Odedoyin of Tower Hamlets FC used abusive language towards him.
>Odedoyin, 32, had been found guilty at Bexley Magistrates’ Court in June and was sentenced on Wednesday.
>Mr Howlett-Mundle said: “I don’t think justice has been done.”
>Odedoyin was told he must complete 120 hours of unpaid work, and told to pay £1,120 in compensation and court costs.
>Speaking to BBC South East, Mr Howlett-Mundle said: “I don’t think it’s going to deter people in the future from being homophobic.
>”With short sentences like this how are people supposed to understand that there’s a lot of pain and suffering that does happen to people like myself and other active LGBTQ+ football players.”
I wonder what kind of punishment he’d think would be acceptable.
120 hours and £1120 seems like a pretty good deterrent to me. I’d be interested to know what was said that was unpleasant enough to attract such a punishment/fine, but seemingly not offensive enough to lead to further confrontation on the pitch.
I assume the offender knew that the victim was bisexual? Is that a prerequisite for a charge of ‘threatening or abusive or insulting words or behaviour to cause harassment, alarm or distress’? Shouting ‘get up, yer fackin poof’ at an opponent rolling around on the floor was pretty standard until relatively recently: basically an accusation of a perceived lack of manly ruggedness rather than a disparaging comment on actual sexuality.
…but given the sentence I’m guessing (hoping) is was a bit stronger than this!
EDIT: [More info here](https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.kentlive.news/news/kent-news/footballer-convicted-hate-crime-against-7250458.amp). Firstly, the perp almost certainly knew that Howlett-Mundle was bisexual (‘video went viral’ etc). Secondly, the phrase used was ‘gay pussy’.
As much as I hate homophobia, I don’t think the courts should be there to enforce politeness or particular beliefs. As much as it might be unpalatable, the law shouldn’t dictate what someone can or can’t believe or express to believe. Imagine if the wrong sort of government comes to power and is able to use the precedent to ban other sorts of things.
I can’t believe just saying something can give you a court case. Free speech is dead.
Freedom of speech does not include freedom to harm people.
Causing distress is simply wrong.