"Twitter Bomber" wins appeal ruling in court
::::Paul Chambers, 28, had sent the message in what
he called a moment of frustration at not being
able to catch a flight from Doncaster Robin Hood
airport.
He had later been arrested and sentenced but the
High Court on Friday upheld his appeal against
conviction.
Speaking outside the court afterwards, Chambers'
barrister John Cooper, who had argued it was
wrong to associate the tweet with terrorism, said
it was a milestone ruling.
"It's a very big decision both nationally and
internationally for hundreds of thousands, if not
millions of people who use Facebook and
Twitter," he told the BBC.
"It means that if you intend to make a joke and if
what you do is a joke, however bad a joke that is,
you cannot be prosecuted," he added.
The case revolved around a tweet sent by
Chambers to a friend in January 2010, which read:
"Crap! Robin Hood Airport is closed. You've got a
week and a bit to get your shit together,
otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!"
Chambers said he sent the tweet to his 600
followers in a moment of frustration and never
imagined it would be taken seriously.
"It was surreal. My world became something
else," he said when asked how he felt when he
was arrested.
Of Friday's ruling he added: "It's an important
decision as far as social networks are concerned
and as far as Twitter is concerned.
"It has established that there has to be an action
that is menacing and is intended to be menacing."
Chambers' case gained the attention and support
of thousands of Twitter users and several high-
profile British comedians.
In Friday's High Court ruling, three judges headed
by the Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, allowed
Chambers' appeal against a Crown Court judge's
decision upholding the 2010 conviction.
They said: "If the person or persons who receive
or read it, (the message) or may reasonably be
expected to receive, or read it, would brush it
aside as a silly joke, or a joke in bad taste, or
empty bombastic or ridiculous banter, then it
would be a contradiction in terms to describe it as
a message of a menacing character.":
he called a moment of frustration at not being
able to catch a flight from Doncaster Robin Hood
airport.
He had later been arrested and sentenced but the
High Court on Friday upheld his appeal against
conviction.
Speaking outside the court afterwards, Chambers'
barrister John Cooper, who had argued it was
wrong to associate the tweet with terrorism, said
it was a milestone ruling.
"It's a very big decision both nationally and
internationally for hundreds of thousands, if not
millions of people who use Facebook and
Twitter," he told the BBC.
"It means that if you intend to make a joke and if
what you do is a joke, however bad a joke that is,
you cannot be prosecuted," he added.
The case revolved around a tweet sent by
Chambers to a friend in January 2010, which read:
"Crap! Robin Hood Airport is closed. You've got a
week and a bit to get your shit together,
otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!"
Chambers said he sent the tweet to his 600
followers in a moment of frustration and never
imagined it would be taken seriously.
"It was surreal. My world became something
else," he said when asked how he felt when he
was arrested.
Of Friday's ruling he added: "It's an important
decision as far as social networks are concerned
and as far as Twitter is concerned.
"It has established that there has to be an action
that is menacing and is intended to be menacing."
Chambers' case gained the attention and support
of thousands of Twitter users and several high-
profile British comedians.
In Friday's High Court ruling, three judges headed
by the Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, allowed
Chambers' appeal against a Crown Court judge's
decision upholding the 2010 conviction.
They said: "If the person or persons who receive
or read it, (the message) or may reasonably be
expected to receive, or read it, would brush it
aside as a silly joke, or a joke in bad taste, or
empty bombastic or ridiculous banter, then it
would be a contradiction in terms to describe it as
a message of a menacing character.":
No comments: