Offensive tweets aren't a crime, says head prosecutor
By Stewart Mitchell
Posted on 19 Dec 2012 at 10:27
Twitter and Facebook posters will be less likely to face prosecution for offensive comments online under new guidelines on how officials should deal with social media.
In the wake of a series of high-profile cases that have seen Twitter and Facebook users hauled before the courts and imprisoned over offensive posts, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said it needed to clarify the issue.
According to the CPS, the interim guidelines on social media aim to strike a balance between posts that should be followed up on, such as those that actively threaten or harass, and those that are merely offensive.
"They make a clear distinction between communications which amount to credible threats of violence, a targeted campaign of harassment against an individual or which breach court orders on the one hand and those that are grossly offensive on the other," said Keir Starmer, Director of Public Prosecutions.
"The first group will be prosecuted robustly whereas the second group will only be prosecuted if they cross a high threshold," he explained.
Do we really want police and prosecutors deciding what speech is tolerable and acceptable? Do they have the experience, intelligence and social sensitivity
"A prosecution is unlikely to be in the public interest if the communication is swiftly removed, blocked, not intended for a wide audience or not obviously beyond what could conceivably be tolerable or acceptable in a diverse society which upholds and respects freedom of expression."
The new guidelines relate to the way prosecutors should deal with cases under two ageing pieces of legislation - the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.
The guidelines also set out what is considered grossly offensive. To warrant legal action, posts would have to go beyond being "offensive, shocking or disturbing," while those that are satirical or rude should not warrant prosecution.
Comments that expressed unpopular opinion or humour would also be acceptable "even if distasteful to some or painful to those subjected to it", the CPS said.
As Starmer noted in a column written for The Times: "Much of what is said online is offensive, shocking or in bad taste."
Despite the intention to clarify the issue, free speech advocates still worry that the law leaves too much responsibility for judging a tweet's offensiveness in the hands of the police and prosecutors.
"Do we really want police and prosecutors deciding what speech is tolerable and acceptable? Do they have the experience, intelligence and social sensitivity to do so? Will they be capable of leaving their own prejudices, including political, religious and social views, at the door?" said Adam Wagner on the UK Human Rights Blog.
"Most importantly, can we imagine a single case in which a prosecution would be appropriate and in the public interest? A prosecution which would make our society better without having a disproportionate chilling effect on free speech on social media?"
Every poster should be accountable
Keir Starmer should understand that tweets are a crime if the tweet involves a lie, or is a deformation of character, If a derogatory statement is published no matter how brief it is read and circulated, and possibly believed as in the disgraceful case of Lord McAlpine and perpetrators should be quickly prosecuted.
Deformation or lies is much different to offensive and there is a culture growing up who do not realise that you can't just say anything nasty and get away with it.
Unfortunately nowadays we do not have free speech in our country, and the onus should be on the site monitors to act quickly, you must not be able to just say anything about someone and then disappear, everyone must be accountable.
By tyler4402 on 20 Dec 2012
- Windows 10: a step back to go forward
- Michael Dell: Cloud infrastructure is the roads, bridges and highways of the 21st century
- How to check your identity hasn’t been sold to the hackers
- Tim Cook: this is how much TV has changed since the 70s
- Westminster wins the .London battle
- 20 years of PC Pro: from deep pan pizza to virtualisation
- Five reasons why the Apple Watch leaves me cold
- Apple Watch, iPhone 6 and 6 Plus: Tim Cook's Apple back with a bang?
- BT Home Hub 5: how to get maximum speed
- 20 years of PC Pro: one-star reviews (including "the worst tablet we've ever seen")
- How to sell more ebooks on Amazon
- 10 ways to make your business more secure
- Top five VoIP mistakes
- How to add in-app purchasing to an iPhone, Android or Windows app
- Remote-control ransomware: TeamViewer and software hardball
- Why laptops with serial ports matter to the Internet of Things
- Make your mobile battery last longer
- Small steps into handling Big Data
- Nexus 5: does it really run stock Android?
- How to get broadband to a garden office