I got verbally abused by some randomer on Twitter for supposedly maligning Brooks (I tweeted a Mean Girls quote relating to her hair). I should really have pointed out that the more she verbally abused Twitter users in relation to Brooks, the more likely she was messing with her idol's case. Instead I just corrected her grammar.
Rebekah Brooks, tweeting and Contempt of Court
In case you haven’t heard Rebekah Brooks and five others have been charged with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.
There’s been a lot of talk on Twitter about it all, obviously. But people need to be really careful about what they’re saying. If you say too much or the wrong kind of thing, you could find yourself in real legal trouble.
The Crown Prosecution have issued a friendly reminder to all: “May I remind all concerned that these six individuals now will be charged with criminal offences and that each has a right to a fair trial. It is very important that nothing is said, or reported, which could prejudice that trial. For these reasons it would be inappropriate for me to comment further.”
The Contempt of Court Act 1981 states that you can’t publish material that creates a substantial risk of serious prejudice to legal proceedings current, pending or imminent. And yes, that does include Twitter.
Now you might argue that your one tweet would not cause a trial to collapse. But think about how many other people are writing that one tweet too. Or you may say that was never your intention. Well, that doesn’t matter either. Prosecution under the Contempt of Court Act does not need to show intent, it is actually sufficient to simply show that the publication happened.
Of course, this does all rely on one key thing: that proceedings are active.
Proceedings are active when: a warrant for arrest has been issued; someone has been arrested; a summons has been issued; or someone has been charged.
So, in the case of Rebekah Brooks and the others who have been charged with her, proceedings have actually been active for quite a while. But the reason we’re mentioning it today is that Twitter is buzzing with talk of the case and we don’t want anyone to end up facing contempt charges. As a general rule, I’d say if you’re not sure, don’t tweet it.
Image on home page courtesy of Joe Dunckley
Related posts:
- How to do court reporting, part one: Tips for going to court Court cases can be great places to pick up a...
- How to do court reporting, part two: Writing up the report Following my post last week about going to court, I...
- How to do court reporting, part 3: Some final tips You may have seen that I’ve been doing a bit...
- Writing (and Tweeting) Outside of my Comfort Zone I never really appreciated how much of an art Tweeting...
Podcasts
Recommended
“Embrace the fear” and other lessons from my time in student media
After finishing my stint in student media, I couldn’t help but look
Student media and a degree: getting the balance
The time is 5.09am, and the birds are twittering outside my window.
Receiving feedback and learning from criticism
I don’t know what I was expecting when I opened that email.
Comments
kj_corcoran on CV Workshop: Ellie House
Hi Ellie. Brave of you to put this up - I remember getting some tough love about a year ago....Posted May 24, 2013
_JenniGraham on CV Workshop: Ellie House
Hi Ellie. I've just had a session on CVs, so I'll hopefully be able to share some of the advice I...Posted May 24, 2013



[...] hard to tell what will do well and get shared around. Recently, Natalie’s post about Rebekah Brooks and contempt of court did really well, it was topical and interesting, and as such got shared around a [...]