Honestly? These lyrics are extremely violent, hateful, and misogynistic — way over any line of normal emotional expression.

[Deleted member 2481]

It's not just that they’re "angry" — anger in music is common — it’s the explicit wishing for rape, murder, disfigurement, suicide, and even mocking someone's dead relatives. That's why they come across not as edgy or cathartic, but genuinely threatening.


A few things that really stand out:

• Graphic fantasies about violence (e.g., strangling, disabling, burning to death).
• Sexual degradation (e.g., repeated references to her genitals and sex life in a humiliating way).
• Personal targeting (using what seem to be real names — "Niamh", "Clarke" — and specific attacks).
• Dehumanization (calling her a “cumrag mistake” — deliberately stripping her of humanity).

When music crosses into this territory — especially involving real people, real names, and real threats — it’s not considered creative expression anymore under the law. It becomes evidence of threatening communications and harassment.

Bottom line:

• If these lyrics are shown in court (which seems likely), they are going to make his case a lot worse.
• They show premeditated hatred and violent intent, not just impulsive bad jokes.
• It will massively hurt any argument that this was "just trolling" or "harmless venting."

 

[Deleted member 2481]

Alright — I’ll break it down seriously, because this is the kind of detailed way a prosecutor or judge would look at it in court.


I'll go line by line and flag the parts that legally make it much worse for Arlo:

---

1.​

"Still holding on tight still paralysed by you"
→ Obsession — shows he’s fixated on the victim, can be used to prove stalking.

---

2.​

"Wish I could be more like Niamh’s pussy, so loose"
→ Sexual degradation — humiliating real named individual (“Niamh”) in a crude sexual way. Real name = targeted harassment.

---

3.​

"Blood boiling at night fantasise what I’d do"
→ Premeditation — indicates violent fantasies are not accidental but recurring. Important for proving "malicious intent."

---

4.​

"I wanna strangle her to death with a cable"
→ Direct violent threat — not metaphorical. "Strangle her to death" is a literal death threat. Criminal offence in itself.

---

5.​

"Better yet leave her brutally disabled"
→ Threat of grievous bodily harm — again, clear criminal intent, shows desire to permanently injure.

---

6.​

"See you it’s on sight lighter and spray can"
→ Implied arson attack — suggests burning her property or even her physically. Serious escalation.

---

7.​

"Won’t rest easy till you’re hanging from a ceiling fan"
→ Encouraging suicide or threatening murder — very serious under Northern Ireland law. Encouraging a death is treated almost as seriously as causing it.

---

8.​

(Repeated chorus)

"Cause she’s always sucking on dick (but not mine)"
→ Sexual humiliation and resentment — shows personal rage over sexual rejection, important for establishing motive.

---

9.​

"Hide behind feminism to justify being a bitch"
→ Political angle doesn't help — not illegal itself, but feeds into a pattern of hatred based on gender (important for "aggravated" offences).

---

10.​

"I'd love to watch you burn to death like a witch at the stake"
→ Explicit fantasy of violent death — another direct death threat — adds to seriousness.

---

11.​

"I wanna see you in a grave / Hope you get gang raped"
→ Absolutely damning — wishing rape and death on someone is the strongest evidence of threatening communications imaginable.
No court will treat this as "just venting" or "a joke."

---

12.​

"Grandpa knew you were a slut probably died from the shame"
→ Desecration of memory of family members — not criminal in itself but paints Arlo as deeply malicious, which affects sentencing.

---

13.​

"It’s for the best they’re not around to see a cumrag mistake"
→ Extreme verbal abuse — again shows pure intent to humiliate and mentally destroy the victim.

---

​

 

[Deleted member 2481]

Possible Defense Strategies:​

1. “It’s Just Artistic Expression”​

• Argument:
  They could say the lyrics are not literal threats, just dark, exaggerated fantasy, like violent heavy metal, horrorcore rap, or shock art.
• Example they might cite:
  Artists like Eminem or Marilyn Manson have lyrics about violence but weren't jailed because they weren't actually threatening specific real people.
• Problem:
  This would be a very weak argument here because Arlo used real names and linked it to real stalking behavior (like photographing her house). In court, "artistic expression" doesn't protect you when it's targeted at a real individual.

---

2. “No Real Intent to Carry Out Threats”​

• Argument:
  They might say Arlo never actually planned to kill, rape, or attack her — it was "blowing off steam" in a disgusting but non-actionable way.
• Problem:
  Even conditional threats ("I hope this happens to you") can still be criminal if they cause real fear — and Arlo went to her house, so he can't easily claim it was all fantasy.

---

3. “Mental Health Issues / Impulse Control”​

• Argument:
  Bring up his attention deficit disorder, maybe suggest other mental health evaluations — argue that he lacks full emotional regulation, not truly malicious.
• Problem:
  While mental health can reduce a sentence, it won't erase criminal liability unless he’s declared legally insane (which is a very high bar).
  Also, he planned, wrote, posted, and repeated — all signs of deliberate action, not just impulsive behavior.

---

4. “Remorse and Rehabilitation Potential”​

• Argument:
  Show that Arlo admitted his comments were "totally unacceptable," apologize deeply, maybe offer to attend therapy, anger management, online safety courses.
• Problem:
  Courts do take remorse seriously at sentencing — but it would only soften the sentence, not eliminate it.
  With lyrics this violent, he would still almost certainly get a custodial sentence — maybe a slightly shorter one.

---

Realistic Defense Outcome:​

• Best-case scenario?
  His lawyer gets him a shorter prison term (maybe months instead of years) by pushing hard on remorse, mental health, and "no real intent."
• But realistically?
  He will be convicted and he will likely serve actual jail time.
  (Especially because Northern Ireland courts are now way less tolerant of stalking and online threats after recent law changes.)

---

Big Picture:​

Prosecution's case:

• Pre-meditated violent obsession.
• Clear threats.
• Real-life stalking.
• Deep emotional harm to the victim.

Defense's case:

• Attempt to paint it as stupid fantasy, no serious intent.
• Play mental health and remorse cards.
• Beg for mercy rather than expect acquittal.

 

[Deleted member 2481]

"
Would you like me to show you a real-life similar Northern Ireland case (from 2023) where someone was jailed for stalking and sexual communications, so you can see how closely it would likely match what happens to Arlo?
It’s eerie how similar it is. "~

damn, I'm scared to say yes. @burn @Scorched Earth @Schizo

 

[Deleted member 2510]

jfl imagine if they played his songs in court ahahahahhahhahaha dude is gonna rope

 

[Deleted member 2019]

jfl imagine if they played his songs in court ahahahahhahhahaha dude is gonna rope

Imagine the whole court suddenly hearing “niamharina on my dick, niamharina on my balls”