arrested in UK for terrorist joke on Twitter
Get flash to fully experience Pearltrees
Chambers win his appeal
Funny is it, Mr Chambers? A big old laugh? Tell that to the theoretical victims of your hypothetical atrocity... Photograph: Str/UPI Photo / eyevine The moment I've finished typing this, I'm going to walk out the door and set about strangling every single person on the planet. Starting with you, dear reader.
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.
Paul Chambers has announced that he is seeking to go to the High Court to challenge his conviction under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003. He has instructed me to put the challenge together and I have, in turn, instructed Ben Emmerson QC, the leading human rights and criminal law barrister. The barristers who fought the Crown Court appeal -- Stephen Ferguson and Sarah Przybylska -- continue to be involved. There has been legal help from a number of other firms and individuals. This is a case which has attracted a great deal of support and offers of practical assistance.
The case of R v Paul Chambers (appealed to the High Court as Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions ), better known as the Twitter Joke Trial , is a United Kingdom legal case centred on an incident in which Paul Chambers was convicted of using Twitter to send a "public electronic message that was grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character contrary to the Communications Act 2003 ".
THE MAN sentenced for threatening to blow up an airport on the Twitter micro-blogging service has a High Court appeal date. Paul Chambers perhaps foolishly threatened to blow up the airport if it was closed when he was due to travel. His joke, just meant for his Twitter followers, said, "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," and it got far more attention than he expected. Chambers was arrested and his case became something of an internet sensation .
Paul Chambers who lost his appeal against conviction at Doncaster crown court wants to go to the high court to appeal against the ruling. Photograph: Christopher Thomond The case of a man convicted of "menace" for threatening to blow up an airport in a Twitter joke is to go to appeal at the high court. A senior human rights lawyer will lead a three-strong legal team for Paul Chambers, a former accounts manager in the motor trade, whose conviction in the so-called " Twitter joke trial " has become an international cause celebre. Dismissed as a foolish prank by almost everyone involved, including police officers and airport security staff, the 140-character threat has landed Chambers, 27, with a criminal conviction and fines and costs totalling over £3,000. He was originally convicted of menace by Doncaster magistrates this summer, after sending a message via Twitter to his girlfriend in frustration at the possible closure of the local Robin Hood airport due to snow.
Paul Chambers, who was convicted under the Communications Act 2003 for a message on Twitter threatening to blow up Robin Hood airport, is having his case heard by appeal judges at the high court. Photograph: Christopher Thomond Two senior judges have retired to consider whether a Twitter message threatening to blow up a snowbound Doncaster airport was a joke or a menace to society. In a landmark high court appeal, Sir Peter Gross and Mr Justice Irwin heard it would take "a halfwit" to treat as a real threat the tweet posted by Paul Chambers in January 2010.
By Chris Brooke UPDATED: 01:01 GMT, 19 January 2010 A man was arrested and held in police cells for seven hours as a suspected terrorist after making a joke on Twitter about blowing his local airport sky high. Paul Chambers, 26, tapped out the comment to amuse friends because his planned trip to Ireland was under threat due to heavy snow at Robin Hood Airport in Doncaster.
Unfortunately for Mr Chambers, the police didn't see the funny side. A week after posting the message on the social networking site, he was arrested under the Terrorism Act and questioned for almost seven hours by detectives who interpreted his post as a security threat. After he was released on bail, he was suspended from work pending an internal investigation, and has, he says, been banned from the Doncaster airport for life. "I would never have thought, in a thousand years, that any of this would have happened because of a Twitter post," said Mr Chambers, 26. "I'm the most mild-mannered guy you could imagine." While it has happened in the United States, Mr Chambers is thought to be the first person in the United Kingdom to be arrested for comments posted on Twitter.