Seductive Liquid

@jezzle9 @FietserGlasgow The post implies driver is a liar and has a strong potential to result in harassment of the driver by making them identifiable. "Reputational harm" could be shown if the driver was able to prove they had a genuine belief when posting in their version of events.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow The woman who ran into the kid on the bike admitted it on a public platform. Harassment in UK law requires a course of conduct intended to cause alarm or distress. It must occur on more than one occasion. This fits neither of those requirements.

Daft kid, just cycling into a stationery (sic) car like that.

@tomjsh @FietserGlasgow You might be correct on the registration, I've only viewed on a phone screen and my phone usually plays low resolution. The context of the post is implying the driver to be a liar - probable, but given the incident they may be an oblivious old person who shouldn't be on the road

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow It’s clearly a reply to a public/public group post. You can remove a post from the public domain all you want, doesn’t mean people can’t repost the record of what you posted. Equally, I can’t see a registration clearly in the video either.

@MedicGrandpa @FietserGlasgow Unwarranted harm and any harassment stemming from the post (which is plausible, especially given some comments) put OP into a risk bracket for legal trouble.

@MedicGrandpa @FietserGlasgow Case for complaint would be the screenshot being posted out of context. Lack of censorship and the combination with the video is implicit of declaring the driver a liar - a possibility exists that the driver was so unaware of their surroundings they genuinely believe their story

@OPrimark @FietserGlasgow Says the one drooling manseed. Do better, your parents are ashamed.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow What a latently homosexual post. What a queer you are.

@54JohnBull @FietserGlasgow Was it a public forum? Are you sure it wasn't a closed group or on a persons fb wall, ringfenced to friends of friends? Separate platform and the limited context make it a problem, as does removing the authors control.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow Not when the woman who drove onto the pavement posted it herself on a public forum.

@theErdTirdMans @FietserGlasgow Licence plates are to identify vehicles, insurance, MOT status and their registered keepers. It is unlikely her comment was in response to the video at all, it also may not have been public but within a private group. The video is fine, it's the combo.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow The entire point of a license plate is to be read and recorded by the public, and it's clear that she wants her name associated with it since she ran to a public forum to do so

@MedicGrandpa @FietserGlasgow The video isn't in question, it's combining the video with the name making them identifiable. The no expectation of privacy applies to information exposed in a public place, the comment from another platform may not have been, and sharing it alongside the video is iffy.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow If you are in a public place there is no expectation of privacy legally, unless the person is a child. As this person is an adult who admitted to being the driver in this video - you are fully entitled to name them and use the video without censorship.

@groundhopper80 @FietserGlasgow I would never suggest it was, I think the driver should get a ban from driving and points on their licence.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow Don’t think running over this kid is legal either. But here we are

@TheRealDarkSole @FietserGlasgow Absolutely and the driver should get a ban, points on their licence etc. That still doesn't change the issue with attaching an identifiable name to the video, the video of course is fine on its own though.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow Running the kid on the bike over is the crime your looking for.

@ClaireMadMax @FietserGlasgow Attempted murder would require intent, this is likely driving without due care and attention or, more likely, dangerous driving. It warrants a driving ban imo and I hope the victim wasn't badly injured.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow Drivers that try to murder children don't deserve privacy

@santapresidente @FietserGlasgow Yeah but you left to end up eating your own feces which isn't really an upgrade?

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow so glad we left your dog shit ass kingdom jesus christ

@54JohnBull @FietserGlasgow Video no, but combining the name is a possible issue.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow There is nothing illegal in putting up the video or public post whatsoever.

@JaimeA330 @FietserGlasgow

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow Are you joking ?

@spanther22 @FietserGlasgow Honestly she probably isn't. Maybe drugs or needs an optician along with a driving ban.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow

@trashpandaclub @FietserGlasgow

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow Delete your account

@richardparke15 @FietserGlasgow On a separate platform, with a post in her control. It is also unknown if her reply was on a fb wall shielded by privacy, in a private group or otherwise.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow A misunderstanding of GDPR aside SHE identified herself.

@JimJusterson @FietserGlasgow

@TerribleDavey @FietserGlasgow I fully agree, the driving standards shown were abysmal, everyone should see the video and the police should take action. That doesn't also mean that her name should be attached from other platform.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow she's hit a child whilst driving on the pavement! she needs banning.

@TimalloyPaul @FietserGlasgow Or you're wrong.

@SeductiveLiquid @FietserGlasgow Thanks for your input Rumpole of the Bailey but you’re wrong.