Pictured: The internet troll who threatened to kill one of MP's children

Pictured: The internet troll who threatened to kill one of Tory MP Louise Mensch's children
In one message, Zimmerman told the MP: ‘Which kid is to go? Who will you choose?’


By LUKE SALKELD
PUBLISHED: 19:05, 8 May 2012 | UPDATED: 20:18, 8 May 2012
Comments (0)
Share

This is Frank Zimmerman - the internet troll who sent a death threat to one of Tory MP Louise Mensch’s children.
Zimmerman, 60, appeared at court yesterday to be sentenced after being found guilty of sending a series of vile messages.
In one email, he told Mrs Mensch, a mother of three, that her computer and telephones had been hacked and that images of her family would be posted on the internet.



Internet troll: Frank Zimmerman, 60, of Gloucester, leaves Gloucester Magistrates Court, after his sentencing was delayed


The full text of the email contained numerous expletives and foul-mouthed insults, and ordered Mrs Mensch to stop using Twitter, where the MP has almost 50,000 followers.

In the most chilling message, Zimmerman told the 40-year-old Corby MP: ‘You now have a Sophie’s choice. Which kid is to go? Who will you choose?’ The question was a reference to the harrowing film Sophie’s Choice in which a mother, played by Meryl Streep, is forced to choose which one of her two children will be sent to a gas chamber during the Second World War.
Zimmerman has repeatedly failed to attend court and was found guilty in his absence last month.
But yesterday he was driven to Gloucester Magistrates’ Court by police officers for the planned sentencing.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2141430/Pictured-The-internet-troll-threatened-kill-Tory-MP-Louise-Menschs-children.html#ixzz1uK7s5Ydp

Another ugly barsteward - he even looks like a troll...

Yes, thought so...a Gloucs address comes up on my Stat Counter

Speaking of trolls - the sight of Chucky and Tango having an attention-seeking contest is a wonder to behold

Chucky appears then i say one thing to her and she vanishes again

Oh, she'll be off in some SSSSS or SSSSfb, looking for sympathy and demanding attention as usual.

I think you missed her stomping onto to twitter - she hurled abuse at someone right out of the blue, then tried to start a fight with Bren. Stupid hater troll.

The forkers won't like this, either:

http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16224444

'Snooper's Charter' Proposals Are Unveiled

12:40pm UK, Wednesday May 09, 2012
Katie Stallard, media & technology correspondent
Controversial Government proposals to increase digital surveillance in Britain have been announced in the Queen's Speech.

The Home Office wants powers to monitor internet traffic, known as communications data, to keep track of serious criminals and terrorists.
But civil liberties campaigners have described the measures as a "Snooper's Charter" and a "dangerous" invasion of privacy.
Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group, told Sky News: "We're really worried about these new plans for internet snooping, they represent a huge increase in the amount of surveillance government has that are really not appropriate.
"People need to be suspected before they're surveilled - that's how the law should work, but what the Government's saying is: 'Were going to treat you all as suspects, and ask you to trust us not to abuse that data.

"These are very dangerous measures - they cross a line, they take us from targeting people that we suspect, to targeting everybody and really lowering the barriers of what the Government can find out about you without going through a court."

But criminal justice professionals say the proposals are about keeping pace with the changes in technology - to catch paedophiles and terrorists - not reading your Facebook status.
In a recent operation in Lincolnshire, for example, codenamed Operation Alpine, police found an industrial-sized computer server hidden inside a cottage, which was used in the distribution of millions of images of child sex abuse.
Using that data, four men were convicted in the UK, and the email trail led them to hundreds more suspects worldwide.
Jim Gamble, former head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre CEOP, said: "What if we didn't have legislation that allowed us to keep up with the criminals, and in six years from now we weren't able to investigate rapists, child abusers or terrorists?
"People would be coming back and saying - what were you thinking of? Why didn't you put in the investment to make sure that you at least kept up with the criminal?"
:: Q&A - How would the surveillance proposals affect you?
The proposals would involve recording "communications data" - the digital fingerprint of who messaged who, when and where - not the actual content of the communication.
The Home Office says it is just an extension of existing powers to cover new technology, as more and more communication moves online, jeopardising the ability of police and security services to keep pace with criminals.
A recent estimate said 25% of requests for communications data by police and agencies could no longer be met.
But some have questioned the cost and the complexity of the operation this would involve.
Professor Peter Sommer, a digital forensics specialist who has acted as an expert witness in some of the country's biggest terrorism and paedophile trials, explained: "In the old-fashioned telephone, when you make a call, a physical connection is made between you and the person you are speaking to, via a series of switches.

"What makes the internet efficient is that you don't need all those direct lines, you just need one connection - all the information is put into what's called a packet and each packet will contain information about where it's coming from and where it's going to, and then the content of the packet.
"But separating the content from the communications data involves specialist hardware called 'deep packet inspection' as well as all the individual filters you'd need for all the different types of internet services, which will in turn need constantly updating, because as we all know - the internet is constantly changing - so there's a vast ongoing cost we have to contemplate."
The Home Office says it does have the technology to make this work, that the content of messages will not be accessed, and that these measures would only be used during criminal investigations, when they could be justified as "necessary and proportionate".
In other words, those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear.
But civil liberties groups are less than convinced. They say this is a digital line that, once crossed, will give the Government unprecedented access to monitor the internet.

----------

I should think one or two in the Hate-the-McCann-family movement should be worried about that; they really cannot blame LE, for taking an interest in people who feel sorry for paedophiles and child rapists.

Or who actively try to prevent an abducted child being found.

Or post filthy, disgusting remarks about a young woman who was kidnapped and raped.

That's the sort of thing that is guaranteed to get the police taking an interest.....

The damage imbeciles can do:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9254739/Asian-sex-gang-member-to-appeal-against-conviction-claiming-jury-was-in-contact-with-BNP.html

Asian sex gang member to appeal against conviction, claiming jury was in contact with BNP
One of nine men jailed as part of a child sex ring is to appeal against his conviction on the grounds that the jury was in contact with the far-right British National Party during its deliberations.

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter3:00PM BST 09 May 2012
Alias Yousaf, the solicitor of Adil Khan, said there had been attempts by right-wing groups to influence the trial “from the outset”.
On May 3, while the jury was still deliberating on its verdicts, Nick Griffin, the leader of the British National Party, tweeted: “Newsflash: Seven of the Muslim paedophile ring found guilty in Liverpool.”
A far-right organisation called the Infidels of Great Britain also reported on its website that seven defendants had been found guilty.
The judge at Liverpool Crown Court was made aware of this and made inquiries of the jury, which had indeed reached guilty verdicts on seven of 11 defendants on trial, though no-one outside the jury room should have known that. The judge decided not to abandon the trial.
Mr Yousaf said: “It is of great concern that the chairman of the British National Party appeared to have been aware of the verdicts before they were even communicated to the court.

“We are left with no option but to conclude that the confidentiality of the jury’s deliberations must have been breached and we submit the proper inference should be drawn that there must have been improper communication from within the jury room to Nick Griffin and perhaps others.”
He said the jury’s impartiality, which is “the cornerstone of any fair trial” may have been compromised and he was launching an appeal on those grounds.
Khan, 42, who made a 13-year-old girl pregnant, was jailed for eight years for conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children under 16, and eight years, to run concurrently, for trafficking girls for sexual exploitation.