Must read posts on the Twitter Joke Trial appeal
Your brief guide to the High Court case.
By David Allen Green Published 07 February 2012 18:23
The appeal of Paul Chambers at the High Court against his conviction under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 takes place on 8 February 2012. As I am acting as Paul's solicitor (I happen to be a qualified lawyer as well as a journalist), I cannot really write too much about the case at the moment. However, the summary and links below should provide all the information and commentary one could want on the case.
In brief: the appeal is entirely on points of law and will centre on the correct interpretation of section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003. Paul's legal team, headed by Ben Emmerson QC (widely considered as the leading human rights lawyer of his generation) and Sarah Przybylska will argue that the threshold for criminal liability under section 127 should be far higher than a case such as Paul's jokey and exasperated tweet. This will be the first time that the High Court has considered the "menacing" communication offence under section 127 and, as Ben Emmerson is leading the appeal, it promises to be a master class in the current state of freedom of expression law.
The hearing starts at 10.30 and is before Lord Justice Gross and Mr Justice Irwin. Lord Justice Gross recently held that anti-war protesters in Luton in 2009 did not have the benefit of Article 10 rights in respect of "breaches of peace"
Factual background
Background to the appeal at New Statesman
My recent post on the appeal at The Lawyer
The "Case Stated" by Doncaster Crown Court at Jack of Kent
Commentary
Blog by Graham Linehan
Charlie Brooker at the Guardian
Nick Cohen at the Observer
Irish blogger "CripesonFriday"
Me at New Statesman
The Pod Delusion special podcast on the fund-raising event
David Allen Green is legal correspondent of the New Statesman and solicitor for Paul Chambers.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















8 comments
It is not too often that a lawyer is also a journalist at the same time. This makes it quite a conflict of interest to blog about certain cases. At least he knows the consequences and is able to make the right decisions about what he should and should not write.
Simon - Investment Fraud Lawyer
If this case goes the wrong way I'm going to line up every judge in the country against a wall and...
I guess these prosocutions go ahead to remove the "i was just having a laugh your honour" defence from the real nutters. But even so I do wonder how everyone involved in his prosecution and conviction sleep at night.
@ McMac
''If this case goes the wrong way I'm going to line up every judge in the country against a wall and..''
You were going to say tickle them weren't you? See if Paul had worded his tweet slightly differently
I'm gonna blow Robin Hood Airport.....
Actually he might have been done under the obscene publication act.
How long can the judges reserve judgment for; indefinitely? It's been months now! Give us the decision.
I am curious to see if his appeal will be successful. I don't have a lot of faith in the UK legal system, our judges seem to be from another planet entirely. But I'll keep my fingers crossed anyway.
If his conviction stands, it will be an injustice.
What boils my piss is the unbroken chain of idiocy that goes into a case like this. It’s not one copper, one prosecutor, it’s a unbroken chain of idiocy from the PC to Judge. All it would have taken is moment clarity from any one of them to stop this nonsense. But no. Us citizens have enough crap to deal with without a publicly funded army of po faced, jobs worth arses trying to fck someone’s life up just because they can.
Machine gunning is too good for them.
Perhaps you could next turn your attention to the case of the young Irishman who was denied entry to the USA because he tweeted that he was going to party so hard he would "Destroy America"?