This week has seen the conviction
of two individuals over comments made on Twitter. It also saw another individual
narrowly escape prosecution for Twitter comments.
Each of the comments was made in
relation to the murder of soldier Lee Rigby in Woolwich, on 22 May.
Deyka Ayan Hassan, a 21 year old student,
suggested on Twitter that those who wear Help for Heroes T-shirts ‘deserve to
be beheaded’. She was subsequently threatened by a large number of people and
when she reported this to the police was herself arrested. She pleaded guilty
to sending a malicious message and was sentenced to complete 250 hours of unpaid
work by Hendon Magistrates’ Court.
Benjamin Flatters, 22, from
Lincoln, also made offensive comments on Twitter following the brutal murder. He too
pleaded guilty to sending malicious communications. However, unlike Ms Hassan,
Skegness Magistrates’ Court sentenced him to 14 days imprisonment.
Mohammed Mazar, 19, of Woking,
Surrey, was charged with improper use of a public electronic communication network
following offensive comments made on Twitter related to the killing. He was due to appear at Guildford
Magistrates’ Court on 11 June; however, the case against him was discontinued.
So what, exactly, were these
individuals charged with?
Communications Offences
Ms Hassan and Mr Flatters were
convicted of sending an article with intent to cause distress or anxiety, under
section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988.
Under that section, a person is
guilty of an offence when they send to another a message which is ‘indecently
or grossly offensive’, a threat, or information which is false (or believed to
be false by the sender). The message can be sent by electronic communication
(such as Twitter), a letter or by any other article. To be guilty of the
offence the person must intend to cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or
any other person to whom the message is intended to be sent to.
For this offence it does matter
if the message ever actually reaches anybody. The offence is simply to send the
message.
The maximum penalty for this
offence is 6 months imprisonment and a £5,000 fine.
Mr Mazar was charged with
improper use of a public communications network, under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003. Under that section, a person is guilty of an offence if
they send a grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or menacing message by means
of a public communications network (such as by Twitter). Again, it does not
matter if the message actually reaches anybody. The maximum penalty is the
same: 6 months imprisonment and a £5,000 fine.
Social Networking and the Law
It is very easy to say things on
social networks, such as Twitter and Facebook, which would not ordinarily be
said in person. It is also very easy to forget the very public nature of what
is said. Comments made on social networking websites are capable of worldwide
exposure in a few mere hours. However, we are just as responsible for what we
say online as what we say in reality. Social networkers should beware of the
potential consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment