Topic: A German comedian could be sent to jail for insulting the Turkish president - page 9. (Read 7562 times)

The Turkish president has insulted himself more than any German could think of doing.

People "flee" to America, Canada, the U.K., Australia and New Zealand more than any other country when they can, because these countries are Common Law countries. A map of the various legal systems of the world is shown here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_the_Legal_systems_of_the_world_%28en%29.png.

What is the benefit of a common law country? Wikipedia says, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law:The interesting thing about common law that Wikipedia doesn't spell out clearly is, in all the common law countries the judges are not necessarily the formal magistrates that oversee a trial. Often the judges are the 12-person jury, even though they are seldomly called this.

Court cases in common law lands can be "moved" by any defendant with knowledge and understanding, into a position where the formal judge (magistrate) has no authority except to referee the trial proceedings. The defendant can make the actual written law to rule, or he can let a jury make a decision, and, if he wishes, he can let the magistrate be the actual judge.

Germany is a civil law country. See Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_%28legal_system%29. Essentially, a civil law country is a country where the written law dictates what the outcome of a trial may be. Because of this, virtual any person in a civil law country is truly guilt until proven innocent.

The courts in a common law country are gradually moving towards a subtle form of civil law. This is because the people are less and less aware of the fact that the defendant can require that the plaintiff get on the stand and speak into the record his complaint or claim. In addition, if it is required by the defendant, the plaintiff must show and prove real harm or damage to himself or his property by the defendant before there can be any semblance of judgement against the defendant. This is why you are said to be innocent until proven guilty in a common law land.

In the case of the German comedian if he were in a common law land, the plaintiff would never appear and get on the stand, and if he did, there would be no real damage or harm that he could show that was clearly attributed to the defendant. But Germany, being civil law, can judge based on whatever it wants, whatever is written in the statutes.

Get yourself to a common law country. Learn how to move the court to remain in common law without the magistrate being the judge. This way you can be free until the plaintiff gets on the stand showing clear harm or damage you did to him, shown by witness and evidence as well as plaintiff speaking it into the record.

Btw, in common law, if the plaintiff loses, you the defendant can require payment in amounts that he was trying to collect from you for whatever damages he was claiming that you did.

Well if we're going to talk law wise it varies from country to country, here in the UK for example I think there are specific laws about mocking public figures, but I need to go and research it carefully, this is what I think slander should be about though, the thing is, people are responsible for their own actions, they can't just blame it on hearsay and so on. So yes, if somebody kept on trying to call you a rapist and nobody does anything then yes, because those are just words, sure they can be a pain but no one is forcing you to read the stuff they're putting out and so on. Now if of course they were trying to stalk you and harass you with this and constantly follow you around that would fall within privacy laws.

My view on this is that it's all fairly self-correcting, because there are almost always stupid people who will think "Oh! This guy keeps making these claims about some other person without any proof, so therefore It's okay for me to beat him up!" so that guy is going to end up in jail if he tries anything and then you have a legitimate case on your hands to go after the guy who's spreading bullshit about you.

This is exactly what due process is for.

Coming from the UK..Can German's be funny ..So give him life for telling a bad joke..
In fact give every German life for telling a joke

If you make a google search you will find that angela mertel is a jew. Also you will find that davuloglu is a crypto-jew. Thats why they have perfect relationships. Freemasonry and Zionists are rulling Europe.

Freedom of speech issue doesn't give anybody to insult others. This is not freedom, this is  crime in every law.

exactly, perfectly agreed.. recep tayyip erdogan is so lunatic and i cant understand why germany - a democratic western county- is playing into the hands of recep tayyip.. there is freedom of speech in germany so everyone can explain one's idea on every  subject for sure...

Oh, then there's a difference over here. So, you're basically saying, in the US I can call you a rapist and as long as nobody actually harms you for it, you have to accept that?
Well, in Germany it's a little different, if I called you a rapist and it can be assumed that that will hurt your reputation, I will probably have to pay a little fine and maybe compensate you for any damage it may have caused. I thought it'd be exactly the same in the US, only probably including a million-dollar lawsuit instead of the measly few bucks we usually get as compensation over here

No, sorry, you still don't get it. The joke is about the interpretation of several laws which are concerned, which is why the comedian made fun of it.
It's really sad that you don't understand it. It is funny. No doubt about it. Many Germans have a good laugh about the whole story

Explaining jokes usually ruins them, and this one is a really complicated joke which even a lot of Germans don't understand. Sorry again for being unable to convey the humor.

Inciting assault, battery or potentially murder depending on how people react because they're ruining somebodies reputation and potentially getting them killed by morons who think they can go around murdering people with impunity, that and there's the financial cost as well because he won't get future employment. Just accusing somebody of rape or sexual assault nowadays is enough to ruin their life and get people to attack them so people who do this without providing any evidence are knowingly putting these people at risk and they affect their livelihoods by causing customers to either stop communicating with them or employers to fire them.

Now if it's for instance, just making fun of them, that does absolutely nothing, you can just turn off whatever media they're using and not watch it or listen or read etc. like the rest of us do, so no, it's not limiting free speech at all, because the person involved is being charged after something has happened rather than just for merely spreading a lie.

If for instance, somebody spread the lie and it did absolutely nothing and people didn't act on it, then there would be no reason to press any charges, slander and libel laws operate on peoples' actions rather than on what they say, at least that's how it's supposed to work.

First of all, he will almost certainly not go to jail, not even for a single day.
Laws state a maximum term, and that's it. Even if he would be found guilty, which is highly unlikely, he would certainly get a measly three months or so, on parole. No jail at all. That's just the way German law works.
Why do you think a comedian, with a professional editorial staff behind him, working for one of the largest media "company"s in Germany, did precisely what he did? Simply because he knows what will happen to him: exactly nothing at all.

By the way, unlike in other jurisdictions, German jail terms are not usually cumulative. So, you don't face three years for the libel plus another 5 years for slander, but rather just one of the two. Kind of a "jail term discount"

Now don't get me wrong here. There are some very good reasons to be upset about the whole cause of this affair. But if people from e.g. the US believe it's about a limit to freedom of speech, it's simply because they don't understand at all what the comedy is all about.

As I said before, his humor's lost on you.


No German law protects any dictator or killer more than any other person.
But, of course, as in the US and practically all "civilized" countries in the world, the law makes no distinction between the people concerned. All men are equal.

BTW, a dictator who is prosecuted by the International Criminal Court would be delivered to Den Haag by Germany.
Fun fact: not by e.g. the USA. But I guess that's just a matter of time.


To sum it up again: the topic you've started is a misunderstanding of the comedian's case.
You simply don't understand his humor and how funny (or not, depending upon taste) it is.
And it's almost impossible to explain it when you're not used to German law

I really thought Germany was better than that. I was really surprised to learn german laws was protecting all the dictators and killers in the world.
You did not chose to be born in germany so you are not responsible for this situation.

yeah, I think three-year jail term is too long for insulting a president. why don't give a little ease? maybe punish them with months jail term, not years.

so just be careful with your tongue. it can be sharper than a sword in case of breaking someone's heart.

As seen above, more or less the same limits to freedom of speech apply in the US.
With the exceptions of Nazi stuff and propagation of violence, as far as I know.

I personally would be more afraid of voicing my opinion in the US than in Germany, simply because the amounts you may be sued for may be ridiculously huge over there, whereas you usually only risk a couple hundred bucks here.
There's just no way someone could sue me for a couple million bucks in good old Germany

And it's precisely the same in Germany.
It's slander and libel. I just looked it up in the dictionary.
What do you think slander and libel are if not laws setting limits to freedom of speech?

If you believe in freedom of speech and expression, you shouldn't have a problem with people insulting other people, as for holocaust denial, making that illegal is idiotic because it can be easily disproven with fact.


This falls under slander and libel, it doesn't require special laws, holy shit Germany is a stupid country when it comes to free speech which is a shame, because they have very sensible laws on Bitcoin.

Hello, I'm a German

Just to set a few things right and into perspective:
freedom of speech is not really limited in Germany.
As long as you voice your opinions, there are just a few minor things you may not say, and even if you do, you usually face a minor fine like a couple hundred bucks.

It is for example illegal to:
- deny the Holocaust + some other "Nazi" stuff
- propagate violence against minorities, e.g. "Kill all muslims!"
- insult people directly and in a demeaning way, e.g. "Peter is an asshole"
- publicly claim as a fact which is not, e.g. "Barack Obama is a convicted child molester"

All of these (and some other exceptions I might have forgotten) may result in prosecution, usually not by a state attorney (only in cases one and two), but by the person you insulted.
If this person is a public figure, it is even asserted that they have to bear a higher level of insult and false statements against them. While I personally could sue someone for calling me an asshole, our chancellor probably could not.

Now, in the case of Erdogan and the comedian, the comedian specifically tailored the words of his poem in a way that is definitely, and without any doubt whatsoever, illegal. Which is precisely what he wanted. He even called his own poem a "Schmähkritik" which is the precise legal definition of where you cross the border of legal to illegal.

If you now believe that the prosecution of this comedian is something against the comedian, you simply don't understand the comedian himself, and his humor is lost on you, sorry, guys.

TLDR; crossing the border to illegality was precisely what the comedian wanted, and what's so funny about it. In no way is freedom of speech in any danger by it.

He will be around for a while. He is in good terms with the NATO heads of state (especially with Merkel and Obama), and he is also supported by the Israelis and the Saudis. And despite butchering thousands of Kurds recently, the mainstream media has refused to condemn him. The opposition is disunited and fragmented.