Chambers v DPP [2012] EWHC 2157<\/strong><\/p>\n Sending a message of a menacing character by means of public electronic communications on \u201cTwitter.\u201d<\/p>\n A 26-year-old man learned that an airport from which he was due to travel was closed due to heavy snow-fall. He responded on Twitter by tweeting: \u201cCrap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You\u2019ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I\u2019m blowing the airport sky high!<\/em>\u201d Five days later, the duty manager of the airport read the tweet and communicated it to the police.<\/p>\n The defendant was charged for sending a public electronic communications message of a \u201cmenacing character,\u201d contrary to s127(a) of the Communications Act 2003. Thequestions arose as to (1) whether the \u2018tweet\u2019 constituted a message for the purposes of s 127(a), and (2) whether the actus reus <\/em>and mens rea <\/em>elements of sending a message of a \u201cmenacing character\u201d were fulfilled.<\/p>\n A post on \u201cTwitter\u201d constitutes \u201ca message\u201d sent by a public electronic communications network under s127(a) of the Communications Act 2003, despite the fact that Twitter is privately-owned and the message was termed \u201ccontent\u201d on the website. Yet, the actus reus <\/em>of the offence was unfulfilled as, on an objective assessment, the \u201ctweet\u201d was not of a menacing character nor could an inference be drawn that it represented a menace in the context and means by which it was sent. The Court considered the language to be unserious and that reasonable members of the public chose to dismiss it as not threatening. The Court also held that the defendant lacked the requisite mens rea <\/em>as he \u201cintended the message as a joke, even if a poor joke in bad taste\u201d (para [38]), thus the intention to send a message of a menacing character is not established.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A 26-year-old man learned that an airport from which he was due to travel was closed due to heavy snow-fall. He responded on Twitter by tweeting: \u201cCrap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You\u2019ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I\u2019m blowing the airport sky high!\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[85],"class_list":["post-6299","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cases","tag-uk-law"],"yoast_head":"\nFacts<\/h3>\n
Issues<\/h3>\n
Decision \/ Outcome<\/h3>\n