Twitter Jokes: Free Speech On Trial
An anonymous reader writes "On 6 January 2010, Paul Chambers typed a flippant tweet that would turn his life upside-down for the next two and a half years. As the courts repeatedly showed a lack of common sense and an ignorance of technology, for a long time it looked as though the right to free speech in the UK was under very real threat. Now that it's over, we can step back and take a detailed look at how such an insane case even came to trial. This article delves deep into the the Twitter Joke Trial: how it happened, what it means, and the epic struggle to balance civility and civil liberties."
If you say "I'm going to kill you if you do that again" should you go to jail?
Just because it is a bit buried in TFA.
By going after someone for a silly twitter comment, you can put on a big show of pretending to do your job with no personal risk at all.
It is very hard for police or prosecution to ever back down. It's embarassing to them. Their culture doesn't allow it, and those on the political side would lose face. Once the legal action has been initiated, it cannot be stopped until a conclusion is reached. This is true in the UK as much as in the US. It's a very good reason to stay away from the police: A single mistake on their part can easily bloom into a years-long life-ruining legal struggle.
I see no reason why this tweet should be protected free speech, it is similar to shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre.
Really, jackass? The reason it's illegal to yell 'fire' in a crowded place is because of the direct harm to life and limb that will occur when the crowd panics and begins stampeding out.
Who got hurt because of this tweet? Who died? Not a damn soul.
Whether a joke or not, it looked sufficiently realistic a threat and the sender should've known this.
Bullshit. Straight up, unadulterated bullshit. This isn't some known terrorist organization making threats, it was a gaddamn accountant bitching about his flight being delayed. Anyone who actually believed this guy was going to do anything other than deal with the flight delay is a fucking imbecile who should be sterilized for the good of the species. That includes you, AC.
Though not enough for years of imprisonment, this is certainly to persecute him and scare the shit out of him to make sure it doesn't happen again.
Right, 'cause the entire purpose of the legal system is to intimidate those who can't afford protracted legal battles into being good, submissive little serfs, right?
Fuck you, fuck the prosecutors who brought this case, and fuck the authoritarian regimes who push such bullshit policies.
I swear I don't know which is worse: The elitist fucks who are working their damnedest to set up permanent police states, or the loser apologists who expect the rest of us to drop trou and grab ankles as readily as themselves.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Guy is a complete idiot.
Funny, I was thinking the same thing about the people who took him seriously...
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Section 2: ...may may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law...
Nice little catch all there. That is NOT free speech. Only the First Amendment of the US Constitution has full protection of free speech explicitly codified into law... WITHOUT being subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law... Free speech has no written guarantees of protection in the UK.
The convention is a sham. Especially one that can be voided where prohibited by law, as the old contest rules used to say
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I think we need to understand here that the Founding Fathers never intended absolutely unlimited right to express yourself in every possible way. Clearly even the Constitution itself puts at least limitation I can think of right off the top of my head; and that is Treason. You are not free to make contact with an enemy of the United States and start giving them the location of nuclear submarines or the alarm code to the Oval Office (yes, I know stupid examples, but I think you get the point). Clearly where speech is used to cause any form of direct harm (the "shouting fire in crowded theater" test), Congress is within its right to pass laws criminalizing such speech. The Supreme Court tends to give the First Amendment a good deal of space to breathe, but it can never be unlimited, because if it was libel and slander laws, for instance, would be unconstitutional. I could tell all your neighbors you are a child molester, and you would have no remedy at all.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Because it's just that, freedom of expression - it's about being free to express your own opinions and beliefs. In no way, shape or form does that give or imply a right to distribute and release classified or sensitive information that doesn't belong to you, which you've not only been trained is legally protected, but have signed an NDA for.