Twitter Airport Bomb Joke Appealed

The High Court heard on Wednesday that the man found guilty of posting a “menacing tweet” was a victim of a legal “steamroller” threatening to make legislation look silly. Paul Chamber says he thought nobody would have taken his joking threat seriously – which was to blow up Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield. The tweet 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!”, which was read by more than 600 followers.

The 27-year-old accountant said he posted the tweet in a moment of frustration after the airport was closed in January 2010 due to snow. Doncaster Magistrates’ Court subsequently convicted him of sending a menacing message contrary to provisions of the 2003 Communications Act, and he was ordered to pay £600 in costs and then fined £385. Now he has asked two High Court judged to overturn a ruling in November 2010, which pushed the costs he has been ordered to pay up to £2,600. He is getting support from fellow Twitter users Stephen Fry and Charlie Brooker.

Crown Court Judge Jacqueline Davies said that the tweet was obviously menacing and that staff at the airport were sufficiently worried to report it. They find it impossible to accept that someone living in the UK wouldn’t be aware, under the current terror climate, of the consequences for their actions in making a statement like that.

On Wednesday, Ben Emmerson QC argued the Crown Court had made a mistake in law and common sense. He suggested to Lord Justice Gross and Mr Justice Irwin that it was hardly likely that someone planning to blow up an airport would tell people about it on Twitter. Convictions and sentences are usually meant to deter offenders, but they had the opposite effect in the Chambers case. His conviction brought on resentment and led to an “I am Spartacus!” campaign being launched, during which 4,000 people tweeted Chambers’ message across Twitter, and non were arrested.

Emmerson added that one needs to use common sense to prevent the law from “looking silly”. The questions he asks are: if the prosecution-conviction-sentence was a disproportionate response and if it was a steamroller. If the sender of a message isn’t trying to convey a threat, such a message shouldn’t be seen as a criminal offence.

The judges had some sympathy for Chambers, but Mr Justice Irwin said that the law can’t be distorted out of sympathy for his position. They don’t want to have a situation where clear jokes are prosecuted as criminal offences, but this is a menacing message that may be serious and could cause much grief. How do we get around that?, he asked.

Chambers was supported by Father Ted writer Graham Lineham and Pub Landlord comic Al Murray, who sat at the back of the court. Murray recently hosted a special benefit performance for Chambers as well. He told reporters outside the court that he defends everyone’s right to tell bad jokes. This is like a Monty Python situation – bonkers and absurd. It means people can’t post what they want or say what they on Twitter, which is incredible to him.

Lineham also spoke with journalists, saying that the case has created confusion about legislation. There are thousands of tweets that could be misunderstood for threats every day. The problem with Chambers’s tweet wasn’t that it was a joke – it was a bad joke. His first series was full of these, and everyone would be in trouble if we were all convicted for bad jokes. There’s a disconnect between what happens in court and outside court, and this needs to be patched up or they will just look very silly.

Chambers was also sent a goodwill message from comedian Steve Coogan. He was in another case at the High Court where his lawyers announced that he has settled for £40,000 in a claim for damages over phone hacking.