Paul Chambers: The twitter airport bomb 'threatener' has been cleared.

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by BuggerAll, Jul 27, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    From the Grauniad:

    This is very good news. This was always a nonsense. Only an idiot would have imagined that his 'threat' was serious. Which just proves that there are idiots working at Robin Hood Airport, the CPS and the judiciary. There should be some sackings.
    • Like Like x 1
  2. He's a ******** who deserved everything he got. Decision should not have been reversed.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Heh.

    This the same Louise Mensch who calls for such networks to be shut down in times of social unrest, and who also launched "Menshn", one such network, last month?

  4. So you think he intended his message as a serious bomb threat, do you? Because that's what he was convicted of.

    If being a ******** is a criminal offence, they'd better start building more prisons, fast.
    • Like Like x 3
  5. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    I don't know whether she did or not but there is a difference. Only a feeble minded cretin would have imagined that Chamber's tweet constituted a threat or was anything other than a jest sent in frustration. Whereas social media on smart phones was used to coordinate riots last summer.
  6. Now I didn't know that this decision was going to go either way.

    I mentioned this bit of law here:

    The wording of the Act is thus:

    Now firstly, we have freedom of speech in this country. But...I tend to agree with the principle laid down in America by the Supreme Court Judge Oliver Wendell Holmes Jnr.

    The caselaw in this country will be different, obviously. Obvously, matters would have been different if there had been a stampede at the time at the airport. Doubtless that assisted his defence, so it is only that things didn't go wrong that assisted him.

    Being highly suspicious, I also wonder if he had turned up in a huge beard and a taqqiyah prayer cap on..... Well, we'll never know will we?

    However, the internet (or at least that bit with a union flag on it) is not and should not be an zone without responsibility.

    However, he has been subsequently cleared at that is that. I look forward to much more rubbish like this as every twat with an IP address does whatever they like and claims it is a "silly joke".

    I rather think that the social good will not be helped by such case law supportive of such behaviour.

    On an aside, Miss Mensch on a different day:

    Louise Mensch: social networks must identify internet bullies who cower behind anonymity - Telegraph

    One thing I do think is that it is utterly hypocritical of Louise Mensch jumping on this to then demand apologies when she is quite happy to demand the full protection of the law in regards the internet when it suits her.

    I suppose she had an equally condemnatory press release written for if the conviction was upheld?

    Power without responsibility, whose perogative was that again?
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Get real, he made a stupid "threat" on twitter and some mouth breather thought he was being serious.

    Bet you wouldn't be so quick to condemn him if he'd been a squaddy trying to get home on leave after returning from a tour.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. He wasn't convicted of bomb threat

    Seperate charge totally.

    Bomb Hoax: Sentencing Manual: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service

    Doubtless that was taken into accountin the charging decision, I suggest.

    But yes, if being a twat is an offence we are going to need more cells.

    Start with Mensch, IMHO.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    Not only did he not intend his message as a threat only an idiot would have thought it was. I would have been happy with his conviction if his 'threat' might have been thought to be serious regardless of whether he intended it or not but that isn't the case.

    If being a ******** is to become an offence then maybe donmac should report himself to the CPS pretty sharpish.
  10. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    Oddly enough it appears that no one took it seriously. The airport took no action as they did not believe it constituted a threat. It was passed up the chain because every one was covering their arrses. It should have stopped with the police. It certainly should have stopped at the CPS and the original courts have proved themselves to be incompetent.
  11. Exactly.
  12. Exactly.
  13. It certainly should have stopped at the Police with a loud bollocking and a caution at most.

    BTW sections a) and b) above as quoted of the act are a bit suss. What's to stop me "feeling" "offended" and "anixous" by a comment posted on here aimed at me ? The openness of that wording is so abuseable it's unreal.....
  14. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    I'm not sure why it is hypocritical to demand that people guilty of something should be punished and that people who are not guilty should not be caught up in the criminal justice system.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. And then he would have complained loudly and vociferously.

    So the complaint was made by the airport. He was nicked. CPS advised the charge.

    Cops pass the buck to the CPS, CPS pass the buck to the courts, courts pass it to higher courts or juries and then appeal courts.

    It's just the way it is now. The days of common sense and chucking some fucks into someone who says, "Fair Play; thanks for keeping it in proportion" are gone.

    Oh, and did I mention a charge is a sanctioned detection? Got to keep those performance figures up for Tom Winsor and his mate the Home Sec.

    And Louise Mensch is still a hypocrite. At least the judges made a decision and stuck to it.