| Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions | |
|---|---|
.svg) | |
| Court | High Court of Justice (Queen's Bench Division) |
| Full case name | Paul Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions |
| Decided | 27 July 2012 |
| Citation | [2012] EWHC 2157 (QB) |
| Transcript | High Court transcript |
| Case history | |
| Appealed from | Doncaster Magistrates' Court |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting |
|
| Case opinions | |
| The message was not objectively menacing; the conviction was therefore quashed.[1] | |
| Keywords | |
R v Paul Chambers (appealed to the High Court as Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions), popularly known as the Twitter Joke Trial, was a United Kingdom legal case centred on the conviction of a man under the Communications Act 2003 for posting a joke about destroying an airport on Twitter, a message which police regarded as "menacing". The conviction in the Magistrates' court was widely condemned as a miscarriage of justice,[2][3][4][5] but was upheld on appeal to the Crown Court. Chambers appealed against the Crown Court decision to the High Court, which would ultimately quash the conviction.[6]
- ^ Martin Beckford (27 July 2012). "Twitter joke trial conviction quashed in High Court". The Telegraph. Retrieved 9 September 2012.
- ^ "The Twitter "Bomb Hoax" case: worse than we thought?". The Lawyer. 2 March 2010. Retrieved 19 September 2010.
- ^ Mitchell, David (16 May 2010). "Sacked and fined £1,000 for a joke about an airport? - David Mitchell column - The Observer". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 19 September 2010.
- ^ Cohen, Nick (19 September 2010). "Twitter and terrifying tale of modern Britain - The Observer". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 19 September 2010.
- ^ "Jack of Kent: Why the Paul Chambers case matters". Blogger. Retrieved 19 September 2010.
- ^ "Robin Hood Airport tweet bomb joke man wins case". BBC News. 27 July 2012. Retrieved 9 September 2012.