Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-01-06 03:33:25 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 3A0CC2DDC6120C5600DB6C1433CCF229F5B0C350C283288BD4F56CA48B1C2083
Participant Details

Original Note:

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/r-v-ul-nasir-judgment.pdf In point #8 of the appeal, the plaintiff's lawyer argues that the trial judge regarded the offending as aggravated due to the race and ethnicity of the victims, which he believed was incorrect. This supports the claim in the original post.  CN not needed.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1876087239945474126
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 3A0CC2DDC6120C5600DB6C1433CCF229F5B0C350C283288BD4F56CA48B1C2083
  • createdAtMillis - 1736134405788
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 18760872399454741263A0CC2DDC6120C5600DB6C1433CCF229F5B0C350C283288BD4F56CA48B1C2083