Source
r/LegalAdviceUK•
GoRedBad

UK Thought Police and Actions Overseas

SPEZ:

As is pointed out in comments below, Count Dankula may not have been found guilty as is stated in the original post. (left untouched for context). However, people are prosecuted successfully for offensive speech in the UK, so feel free to substitute Dankula for another example. I will be sure to make a further update when the Dankula verdict comes out.

ORIGINAL POST:

Lately the freedom gap between the USA (where speech is protected for all) and the rest of the world has been widening. Not least in the UK where online funnyman Count Dankula (Markus Meechan) was recently found guilty of "offensive communication" and may spend a year in prison as a result.

If you're not familiar with the case, Dankula published a video on youtube where he teaches his girlfriend's dog to raise its paw (like a nazi salute) in response to nazi slogans. Dankula makes clear at the beginnng of the video that he is not racist and is only making the video to prank his girlfriend.

His prosecution strikes me as nonsensical overreach when, for example, hip-hop artists routinely use racial slurs on albums that are bestsellers at HMV. Is that not communication that is just as offensive? Especially since there is no disclaimer stating words to the effect of "the N word is used in this song for the purposes of entertainment only".

Of course is it reprehensible to conduct a campaign of harrassment against an individual, especially for attributes they cannot control (such as race or other protected characteristics), but to criminalise speech that presents no immediate threat except to a non-specific person's feelings is the thin end of a very oppressive and totalitarian wedge.

I feel like fifteen years ago this point was obvious to virtually everyone with half a brain, but the changing social climate has made it easy for the government to edge us into a fearful environment where people cannot speak their mind and must preface anything slightly controversial with "I'm not a racist, but..." - and even then not have a guarantee of safety.

So I was wondering, what might be the ramifications of my paying a visit to the USA, and while there, creating a twitter account in my own name for the express purpose of trolling UK police accounts with as many offensive words as I can think of?

I'd like to target EVERY protected characteristic and single out no particular group. Basically offending every possible person that could read the tweets (including my own groups) but making zero threats, perhaps even making my lack of violent intent explicit.

I could then let the tweets sit for a few days, before deleting them and the entire account prior to re-entering the UK.

No doubt I would be paid a visit, but would the police have any legal basis to bring charges against me? I feel like it would be akin to prosecuting me at home for buying cannabis in Amsterdam.

Can anyone with legal expertise assist me with this hypothetical scenario? Excuse me if this seems far less serious a topic than might usually be dealt with in this forum, but I feel that speech is the fundamental freedom underpinning all other freedoms, and the rules of speech are unclear at best everywhere in the world but the USA.

Posted Jan 14, 2018, 11:08 AM UTC · edited

014
ConventionalizedDreg•

All the people making this fucking stupid claims never link to the actual court cases, they only ever link to some shitty US website saying "ZOMG FREEDOM OF SPEECH".

All of the usual examples given by those sites include people committing campaigns of harassment, or making credible threats of violence.

13
GoRedBadOP•

So how would you discuss this in the context of my hypothetical?

-11
Chips-n-cheez•

This isnt a politics sub.....we don't discuss

9
GoRedBadOP•

This subreddit is intended for the discussion UK Law and Legal News and promoting help for people who need it .

I must have misunderstood the description!

1
Chips-n-cheez•

You're injecting a distinctly political slant into your hypothetical query. You've come here with an opinion and you want us to validate it. When we have disagreed you've given reasons as to why the law should be changed. That isnt the purpose of this sub.

3
Chips-n-cheez•

Firstly, has he actually been found guilty? The most recent article dated the 8th January states the trial continues. You need to link to your sources.

Secondly, and for everything else. We have freedom of speech in the UK. To say we dont is a gross over-simplification of what freedom of speech actually entails. If you want examples of countries that don't actually have freedom of speech you need to travel a few hundred miles to Russia where opposition politicians and activists are routinely arrested, assaulted and murdered for speaking out agajnst Putin.

What we don't have is freedom from responsibility. You can absolutely say whatever the fuck you like. Anyone else absolutely has the right to respond in an appropriate manner.

As for your "hypothetical plan". If you limit yourself to filming in the USA and don't direct your hate filled idiocy at anyone then you won't break any British laws. If you direct those messages at individuals or organizations within the UK then the offences of harassment, malicious communications and racially aggravated public order will all have been committed.

10
GoRedBadOP•

I believe the last I heard in the Meechan case was that he was found guilty, but awaits sentencing in March. If this is wrong, I apologise for unintentionally misleading. However the point I make still stands. Even with his fate in a Schrodinger superposition... Meechan could be put in jail for something that rappers do routinely without legal repercussions.

What is the difference between Dankula's crime and that of a rapper who releases a record criticising, say, "bitch niggas" (a term intended to insult black men who are deemed to be unmasculine)? We don't know if said rapper presents his message sincerely or not, but Dankula expressly stated his message was not serious.

If you could point me to the legislation enshrining UK freedom of speech I would be grateful. As I said the USA is the only place in the world where one can say anything one wishes without legal penalty (with the sole exception of speech that threatens or incites violence) due to the protection afforded by the First Amendment. This has been tested in court again and again.

There is no such legal protection in the UK and indeed there are increasing numbers of successful prosecutions for offensive speech. In other words, you can go to jail for offending someone. This is purely in the realm of personal feelings, for without a doubt, what is offensive to one person is innocuous to another. (Beside the point with regard to legality, this leads to the obvious conclusion that offence is taken, not given.)

Yes, speech in the USA comes with the consequence of others responding in whatever manner they choose, including possible civil suits, but this is completely different from the state choosing to prosecute and punish people for causing offence.

With regard to the final paragraph of your response, under what law can the UK prosecute someone for actions outside the UK jurisdiction, in a state that explicitly protects such expression?

Let's say I target the Men & Boys Coalition and suggest that they are nothing but sexist wife beaters who shirk their responsibility to their families, add that they lack testicles, and perhaps throwing in a few harsh terms to the effect that they are, to a man, closet homosexuals and/or love to rape farm animals. (For the record, I do not hold such hateful beliefs about any such organisation, or any group. It is purely for the sake of argument).

If I did this in the UK jurisdiction, then yes I could be prosecuted under UK law, but as I said, how can the Police prosecute me for doing something that is legal in the USA, while I am in the USA? How will this amount to offences of harassment, malicious communications and racially aggravated public order?

How is this not the legal equivalent of charging me for possession of drugs in the UK, because I bought (not even consumed) some legal cannabis in another country?

Remember, in this specific example, I have deleted the communications prior to my return to the UK, so the tweets could not even be said to be an ongoing communication that I continue to endorse while present in the UK.

It is a fairly ordinary thing for citizens of any country to go overseas for the purposes of enjoying activities that are illegal at home - one of the most common for UK citizens being the enjoyment of recreational drugs and prostitution abroad.

(It may not be strictly relevant to the point, but this example is not about filming anything, just about text-only tweets. I think the message would be more immediate and effective that way).

As I'm writing this, my learned friend raises the point that buying drugs abroad has no impact on any UK citizen, whereas directing a communication at them clearly does. So that leads me to further enquire, would a US citizen communicating exactly the same message to the same recipient as myself be liable to arrest on a visit to Great Britain?

Furthermore, regardless of the eventual verdict, could Dankula have avoided prosecution by filming and publishing his video from outside the UK?

-8
DrTaff•

Yes, speech in the USA comes with the consequence of others responding in whatever manner they choose, including possible civil suits, but this is completely different from the state choosing to prosecute and punish people for causing offence.

But that's just not true. Here are four examples of Americans being arrested for comments made on Facebook.

Here's also a list of things not covered by the American First Amendment which is a lot more than just the "sole exception of speech that threatens or incites violence".

Look at the wording of the First Amendment, it's about stopping the government from implimenting laws to restrict the freedom of speech, NOT that you are free to say whatever you want without concequence and while most concequences in the US would seem to be from private parties the US government can and does punish people for things said online.

If you could point me to the legislation enshrining UK freedom of speech I would be grateful.

[Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_10_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights) which was brought into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998 which states:

Article 10 – Freedom of expression

  1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
  1. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

Once again, like the US First Amendment, it's about preventing governments from restricting you ability to say things, not that you can say them without concequence.

7
GoRedBadOP•

Thank you for a very helpful and well written reply - that's why I came here!

3
Chips-n-cheez•

I'm not going to go through all your points and argue with you because I'm on my phone and I cannot be bothered.

But. The UK can claim jurisdiction over all many of things. If you go abroad and indulge in sex with children you can be prosecuted in this country. Likewise if you commit a crime where the victim is in the UK the aurhorities can prosecute you for it, either by waiting for you to return or by launching extradition proceedings. This happens for all manner of crimes, and arguing that the UK government has no right to is utterly irrelevant. If you do something that is illegal in the UK and affects someone in the UK then you can be orosecuted by the UK. It is one of the cornerstones of international diplomacy that you cant just hide overseas.

Now all of your freedom of speech nonsense. Its clear you came here with an agenda and I doubt very much that whatever we say we will not convince you otherwise. Firstly, the law is the way it is because society as a WHOLE has chosen it to be. If you want to "opt out" then you can either campaign for the law to be changed and hope that you can convince the majority of other people to follow you, or you can fuck off and leave.

Freedom of speech is the freedom to criticise, campaign, question in a free democracy. It is NOT the freedom to act like a fucking dickhead. You'll find that if you goto America and start a campaign of harrassment against minority groups you'll be arrested and prosecuted as well.

Just because you don't find the things you say are offensive, does not give you the right to treat other people in an offensive manner. You can argue the point as much as you want but the only people you will find to agree with you are your chums over in the Donald echo chamber. In civilised society you'll find that the vast majority of us are happy that people who abuse and offend other people deliberately and with malice are prosecuted for it.

4
Rob_using_Reddit•

If you post your offensive messages from the USA then you won't commit Malicous communications in the UK.

However insulting a police officer in the UK is not a particularly easy feat. Like any job there are some who are easily offended but the majority won't bat an eye lid at some lame offensive political stunt and you will just look like a bell end.

3
ripnetuk•

I think this is a really interesting question. I've attempted to ask similar questions before for academic interest (no I wouldn't lower myself to arsehole trolling even when out with the uk.

Another example would be if I revealed the subject of a super injunction while on holiday. Let's say I tweeted it was Ryan gigs who was the subject of it when it was banned in the UK . Would I be in contempt even though I was physically elsewhere and the network used was outside the UK

2
AutoModeratorMOD•

To Posters Reddit is not a substitute for a qualified Solicitor.Please only use responses as guidelines to better prepare yourself for when you meet with a Solicitor or qualified legal advisor. Any advice is academic in nature and should not be relied upon.

If you have a legal problem, you should consult a qualified solicitor. DO NOT rely on any advice given herein or in the linked posts - see Free Advice Sessions.

To Readers/ Commenters

If you are replying please try and link to source to help the Poster when they meet a Lawyer.

If you feel someones advice is wrong cite sources as to why.

Please keep in mind the [Rules] (https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/)

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1