“Scientists and academics are to be given extra protection from bullying corporations that use Britain’s libel laws to suppress legitimate criticism and debate, the Government has indicated.”
The Independent, 12th October 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“Today I am talking to John Cooper QC. The DPP is holding a series of round table meetings to consider where the law should be in relation to online social media spoken and written. Rather strangely – while the DPP invited lawyers who have been involved in recent high profile cases and some lawyers who weren’t even peripherally involved – Keir Starmer QC did not extend an invitation to leading criminal silk John Copper QC who actually led the team in the celebrated Paul Chambers Twitterjoketrial case – which the team won.”
Charon QC, 10th October 2012
Source: www.charonqc.wordpress.com
“Charon QC” is the blogging pseudonym of Mike Semple Piggot, editor of insitelaw newswire.
“A 12-week prison sentence given to a man who posted offensive comments on Facebook about missing April Jones and Madeleine McCann has been criticised by legal commentators as disproportionate. But are judges and magistrates out of touch when it comes to social media?”
BBC News, 10th October 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The director of public prosecutions is exploring whether Facebook and Twitter should take more responsibility for policing their networks for abuse and harassment in an attempt to reduce the number of cases coming to court.”
The Guardian, 9th October 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A 20-year-old has been sent to prison for twelve weeks for posting offensive and derogatory comments about missing five-year-old April Jones on his Facebook page. His attempts at humour were undoubtedly stupid, offensive and exhibited incredibly poor taste and timing. But is a long spell in prison really the way we should be dealing with offensive idiots? Is a law which was passed before social media existed now placing a significant chill on our freedom of expression rights?”
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th October 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Director of public prosecutions to draft guidelines about prosecution for offensive, indecent, or obscene comments online.”
The Guardian, 9th October 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Senior high court judge Michael Tugendhat says media lawyers have a duty to seek judicial appointments.”
The Guardian, 2nd October 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
5RB Conference: Keynote address (PDF)
Speech by Mr Justice Tugendhat
5RB Conference, 27th September 2012
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
“A free press is just as important as an independent judiciary, the Lord Chief Justice has declared.”
Daily Telegraph, 27th September 2012
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Divorcing couples have been given reassurance that their private financial affairs will remain confidential even when the media attend court, following a recent judgment from the family court.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 26th September 2012
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“Keir Starmer QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions, has said:
‘On 30 July 2012 Daniel Thomas, a semi-professional footballer, posted a homophobic message on the social networking site, Twitter. This related to the Olympic divers Tom Daley and Peter Waterfield. This became available to his ‘followers’. Someone else distributed it more widely and it made its way into some media outlets. Mr Thomas was arrested and interviewed. The matter was then referred to CPS Wales to consider whether Mr Thomas should be charged with a criminal offence.'”
Crown Prosecutions Service, 20th September 2012
Source: http://blog.cps.gov.uk
“The Crown Prosecution Service has published its final guidelines on the prosecution of journalists over illicit newsgathering methods, with so-called ‘fishing expeditions’ to face closer scrutiny.”
The Guardian, 13th September 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Self-interested tabloids enjoy reporting on the existence of an injunction. We have seen what this unfettered power can lead to.”
The Guardian, 6th September 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“So there you have it. We spend a whole year discussing press ethics and then, for the sake of a peek at Prince Harry’s bum, half the world seems ready to say that the editor of The Sun can make up his own ethics.”
Legal Week, 24th August 2012
Source: www.legalweek.com
“Where editors would once have cried ‘publish and be damned’, this time they bowed to warnings.”
The Independent, 24th August 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“One of the possibilities being considered by Lord Justice Leveson as he writes the Report for Part 1 of his Inquiry is whether there should be compulsory regulation of the print media. One, widely discussed possibility is a statutory framework which would require any publisher with turnover or readership above a set threshold to join a ‘regulatory body’: compulsory regulation for large publishers.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd August 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Anna Heenan, solicitor and David Salter, Joint Head of Family Law at Mills & Reeve LLP analyse July’s financial remedies and divorce news and cases.”
Family Law Week, 10th August 2012
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions [2012] EWHC 2157 (Admin); [2012] WLR (D) 234
“A message which did not create fear or apprehension in those to whom it was communicated, or who may reasonably have been expected to see it, was not of a ‘menacing character’ within the meaning section 127(1)(a) of the Communications Act 2003. That provision created an offence of basic intent and, accordingly, the mental element of the offence was satisfied if the accused were proved to have intended that the message should have been of menacing character or alternatively, to have been aware of or to have recognised the risk at the time of sending the message that it might have created fear or apprehension in any reasonable member of the public who had read or seen it. Moreover, a ‘tweet’ sent via the social networking site Twitter, was ‘a message’ sent by an electronic communications service for the purposes of section 127(1) of the 2003 Act regardless of whether the tweet was read as a ‘message’ or as content on the website.”
WLR Daily, 27th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The arrest of a teenager by police investigating abuse of Olympic diving star Tom Daley on Twitter has led to calls for a new initiative educating the public about the ease with which a tweet can end with a jail sentence.”
The Guardian, 31st July 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Twitter users have to understand that every tweet is a broadcast – even if it’s prefaced with an @.”
The Guardian, 31st July 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024