Big V 271 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 New guidelines could see fewer people being charged in England and Wales for offensive messages on social networks.The Director of Public Prosecutions said people should only face a trial if their comments on Twitter, Facebook or elsewhere go beyond being offensive.He said the guidance combats threats and internet trolls without having a "chilling effect" on free speech.The guidance means some people could avoid trial if they are sorry for criminal comments posted while drunk.The guidance comes after a string of controversial cases, including the prosecution of a man who tweeted a joke threatening to blow up an airport.Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer said the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had now dealt with more than 50 cases relating to potentially criminal comments posted online - but there was so far very little case law set by senior judges to guide which trials should go ahead.He said the interim guidelines, which come into force immediately, clarified which kinds of cases should be prosecuted and which would only go ahead after a rigorous assessment whether it was in the public interest to prosecute.'Grossly offensive'The guidance says that if someone posts a message online that clearly amounts to a credible threat of violence, specifically targets an individual or individuals, or breaches a court order designed to protect someone, then the person behind the message should face prosecution.People who receive malicious messages and pass them on, such as by retweeting, could also fall foul of the law.However, online posts that are merely "grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or false" would face a much tougher test before the individual could be charged under laws designed to prevent malicious communications.Mr Starmer said that many suspects in this last category would be unlikely to be prosecuted because it would not be in the public interest to take them to court.This could include posts made by drunk people who, on sobering up, take swift action to delete the communication because they are genuinely sorry for the offence or harm they caused.Individuals who post messages as part of a separate crime, such as a plan to import drugs, would face prosecution for that offence, as is currently the case.Mr Starmer said: 'These interim guidelines are intended to strike the right balance between freedom of expression and the need to uphold the criminal law."The interim guidelines thus protect the individual from threats or targeted harassment while protecting the expression of unpopular or unfashionable opinion about serious or trivial matters, or banter or humour, even if distasteful to some and painful to those subjected to it"Earlier this year, senior judges overturned the conviction of Paul Chambers who tweeted in 2010 that he would blow up Doncaster Airport because he was frustrated that it had been closed by snow.Mr Chambers, and his many high-profile supporters, always said the tweet was meant as a joke and should not have been taken seriously.Quashing the conviction, the Lord Chief Justice said Mr Chambers should not have been convicted of sending a menacing communication because it did not amount to a serious threat that created fear or apprehension.Asked if he now regretted the prosecution of Mr Chambers, the DPP said: "A judgement call had to be made about that case. The Divisional Court ruled that our judgement call was wrong and I accept that."Although the interim guidance is now in force, its final form is subject to a consultation that runs until 13 March 2013.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20777002 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carsons Dog 9,878 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Oh dear, the police might have to go back to chasing real criminals again Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazzapat 83 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Problem is, that's English law.What we have to face comes under the guidance of a policy set down by the Scottish government and passed into scots law. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carsons Dog 9,878 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Problem is, that's English law.What we have to face comes under the guidance of a policy set down by the Scottish government and passed into scots law.Could be a grey area if the website is hosted abroad Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big V 271 Posted December 19, 2012 Author Share Posted December 19, 2012 What law applies to comment posted on RM? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carsons Dog 9,878 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 What law applies to comment posted on RM?Might be the one relevant to either the location of the poster or where the site is hostedI suspect the former so if you want to slag the Bheasts off do it from Carlisle Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Nosed Babe 21,536 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 There is bound to be a test case up here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Nosed Babe 21,536 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Problem is, that's English law.What we have to face comes under the guidance of a policy set down by the Scottish government and passed into scots law.Not necessarily, the courts decide plenty of things without there being legislation. Sometimes legislation has to be made to accommodate a court decision. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carsons Dog 9,878 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 There is bound to be a test case up here.Not if those stupid lawyers keep advising their clients to plead guilty. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Nosed Babe 21,536 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Not if those stupid lawyers keep advising their clients to plead guilty. LOL... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardian 4,281 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 When giving somebody abuse whilst assaulting them becomes a bigger crime than the assault, it's time to start re-examining the law.We are never done hearing about how busy the courts are, yet Salmonds got the police enforcing every petty little breach.It's time we amended these laws, like the english have done. It's making us a laughing stock.There are some of a certain persuasion who are like the Taliban. Speak against them, they shout "Blasphemy" and Salmonds Stormtroopers are kicking your door down and hauling you off to jail before you can even put your shoes on.Somebody will eventually take the government and the legal system to task over this and they will be forced into a humiliating and very public climbdown.They would be far more sensible amending it now before that happens.Hang on, somebodys at the do.............. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornabear 6,275 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 This Law is for England and Wales, which means I can do it but Scottish folk cannot.Whatever happened to "Free Speech" which is written into the British Constitution.Britain is the whole Island Country of England,Wales and Scotland.It would appear that Salmond's Scotland has already pronounced Itself Independant.Didn't this sort of thing happen in Germany in 1933. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupret 223 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Not if those stupid lawyers keep advising their clients to plead guilty. I thought stupid lawyers wrote dodgy blogs, or that only them that are guilty of misconduct? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalandtrueblue 69 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 This Law is for England and Wales, which means I can do it but Scottish folk cannot.Whatever happened to "Free Speech" which is written into the British Constitution.Britain is the whole Island Country of England,Wales and Scotland.It would appear that Salmond's Scotland has already pronounced Itself Independant.Didn't this sort of thing happen in Germany in 1933.Scots law has always been seperate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.