DPP publishes full and final social media prosecution guidelines

CPS press release with full list of links to relevant documents and guidelines here.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/latest_news/dpp_publishes_final_guidelines_for_prosecutions_involving_social_media_communications/

Telegraph write up here.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/social-media/10132657/Offensive-online-posts-to-escape-prosecution-if-writers-apologise-say-new-guidelines.html

Christopher Hitchens left England in part, because of the Libel Laws

We have a great tradition in this country. It goes back a long way; the classic statements of which are in John  Milton's Areopagitica, and in John Stuart Mill's essay On Liberty where it is said (Christopher Hitchens paraphrases):

"However discredited an opinion may be, to ban it would still be a huge mistake; because otherwise there would be no way of finding out if you yourself had made a correct point. If you had no opponent; if you silenced them there would be no opponent. There would be no measure of your own articulacy or your own willingness to argue."                                             (At 56 minutes 40 seconds of video above)

Hitchens adds his take:

"Thus, it must always be the case that any opinion, no matter how unpopular must be at the front and centre of the argument."

Christopher Hitchens then said that Rosa Luxemburg put it even better:

"Freedom of speech is meaningless unless it's for the person who thinks differently."

Member of the audience then asked: "do you believe in the laws of libel and slander?"

Christopher Hitchens replied:

"No. I left England partly because of the laws of libel. It makes journalism almost impossible. Because again, it's a matter of her feelings (lady beside him). The person bringing a law suit in Britain (many of them tried it on me when I was here) has only to prove that their reputation has been damaged or that their feelings have been hurt. They don't have to prove what I say is not true."

He then added a real shock and awe statement which if you think about it, does kind of ring true. Hitch said:

"There you have it again: it's a secular form of a blasphemy law."                                                 (At 57 minutes 25 seconds of the video above)

Powerful stuff. YouTube video in full here.

How Free is Our Speech? - Radio 4 Discussion

Clive Anderson recently chaired a discussion on Radio 4 that asked a simple question: how free is our speech in Britain today? The discussion also took the time to considered specifically how speech on social media should be controlled or otherwise.

Billed as 'the programme that gets behind the legal issues of the day,' it certainly did that. You can listen to the episode in full here.

Clive Anderson kicked things off with a nice overview of the legal history as it exists in law in Britain to date and how this contrasts with our love of freedom:

Twitter is "inherently dangerous" says David Aaronivitch

The broadcaster and journalist David Aaronivitch (@DAaronovitch) has waded into the McAlpine/Bercow affair and has added his two cents to the debate. He's thrown up some interesting points and insights. Writing in the Times (full article here) the title and header where hard hitting, going like this:

The McAlpine v Bercow High Court Hearing as it Unfolded on Twitter

Full stream of live tweets from (@JackofKent) who attended the preliminary hearing at the High Court in the case of Bercow v McAlpine. Full ruling by Lord Tugendhat here.

Today at 10.30am, ruling of High Court on whether #Bercow's "Why is Lord McAlpine trending? *innocent face*" tweet was defamatory at law.
— Jack of Kent (@JackofKent) May 24, 2013

Charon QC Law Tour Podcast: John Cooper QC on Social Media and the Law

John Cooper QC and Paul Chambers of #TwitterJokeTrial

Below are the blunt words of Keir Starmer QC, the former Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). Why the bluntness? The former head of public prosecutions in England and Wales was obviously angered by the criticism delivered by experienced criminal silk, John Cooper QC (@John_Cooper_QC) who cast doubt on the newly published (December 19 2012) interim social media prosecution guidelines. Here's what he said:

“Well I don’t think John Cooper with all respect has seen anything like the number of cases I have. I don’t think he has thought about the sophistication of the issues. There are many cases…I mean he can point to one case [the Twitter Joke Trial]…yeah he makes a cheap point about one case. I've got to deal with the many thousands of cases that come in; I've got to deal with all the chief constables. So, yes, nice cheap point, but actually let’s get back to reality.”