IT’S A LONG MOTHER-FUCKER – GRAB A COFFEE OR BEER
Apologies for the lack of posting over the festive period, things have been rather hectic, I’ve had to work, attend court, run around after Santa making sure Olly Jnr was going to get his presents etc. There is however a rather long blog post waiting to go live, it includes the full disclosure the prosecution handed over when they attempted to charge me with harassment. I have to unfortunately redact names from said disclosure as if I publish it as is I will end up breaking bail conditions and end up being re-arrested or something.
I attended the postponed pre-trial hearing on the 21st December fully expecting the prosecution to finally hand over all disclosure and fully expecting all the charges against me to have been particularised. As it turns out this didn’t happen. The pre-trial hearing was supposed to have been where the prosecution and defence sat and talked through all the requirements for the actual trial, arranging witnesses to be called etc. I wasn’t actually required to be at the pre-trial hearing but because I want to be involved every step of the way I attended. My legal counsel also suggested I attend. Which I did, after a fashion (alarm clock failure, but not so bad as to miss anything). As I arrived there I was escorted to a private conference room where my barrister was sitting with a whole bunch of paperwork in front of him.
He advised that it looked like the prosecution didn’t have a case and they were going to drop the harassment charges (hooray!) but they were going to charge me with grossly offensive malicious communications, which I’ll get to in a bit. My barrister also showed me the proposed restraining order the prosecution want to issue me, as it stands it’s looking very scary indeed, not only for me, but for Tweeters and bloggers too, which again I’ll explain in a bit…
We were called to the court room and I was escorted to the now hilariously funny glass box (funny to me because I’m such a hardened criminal they have to lock me away from the general public.) Bear in mind I wasn’t even supposed to be there so why they did so is beyond me. It all became very clear. The prosecution admitted to the judge that they had no case against me for harassment and the judge then passed a not guilty verdict. In the eyes of the law I have not harassed anyone. That much has been blatantly clear from day one innit?
However the prosecution did charge me with grossly offensive malicious communications, based on two Tweets I made at the beginning of October. In these two Tweets I posted a picture of a house, and invited people to guess who lived there, I also said I’d give the address at a later stage. I never did give the address, that’d have been silly for a number of reasons. I also invited people to post shit (not literally) through the door. At no time did I ever say who’s house it was. I never in a million years thought anyone would guess. Sadly for me, someone did and they reported this to said person, and both of them embellished the truth in the hope it would get me into further trouble (Keep an eye out for the disclosure in a future blog post).
From the beginning this whole sorry episode has been politically motivated by those who I’ve exposed, by those who want to silence me lest they get caught doing the wrong we all know they’re doing. So I’ve been offensive in the things I’ve said, so fucking what. They have the right to be offended and I have the right to offend, I’ve always maintained this. If you don’t like what I write don’t read it. It’s a very simple solution. Which brings me nicely to the new charge.
The prosecution are going to have a hard time defining what grossly offensive is, they recognised this straight away, simply put, what I find grossly offensive you might not, and vice versa. They’re going to have to define it very clearly because it could have very serious implications in the future, and this is why I believe this is an important case, not high profile and not just because it’s me that’s being prosecuted, but because of the implications it has for you the Tweeter, you the blogger, you the Facebooker, in fact even you the emailer. You see if the prosecution get their way it opens up a huge can of worms that frankly I’d not want and I don’t believe you will either.
I’m being accused of sending a malicious communication, via Twitter. Said communication was aimed at no one in particular, it was never intended to be malicious, it was an opportunistic, off the cuff Tweet that I Tweeted to be controversial and funny and was not directly Tweeted at the alleged victim of my crime. In fact said victim of my crime doesn’t even have a Twitter account and hadn’t even seen the Tweet when he reported it to the police, or even when he made his statement to the police (Again see disclosure in a future post). In fact this only became a problem when a third party saw my Tweet and reported it to the victim and the victim via proxy claimed to be harassed by myself. He never claimed I sent him any malicious communication, I never have.
So we have two halves of a charge neither of which can be proved, yet the prosecution still insists on charging me. Why? Here’s my theory and anyone who reads this post can dispute said theory in the comments.
The council saw a chance to silence both bloggers in Bexley (search this blog for Prevention of harassment letter). I was the easier target of the two and they’ve been trying to find a way to silence me in anyway they could. In fact so desperate were some people they lied and gave false information to the police. (See disclosure in a future post). The police, either through sheer incompetence or in an effort to please their paymasters totally mismanage the whole case. (I’m inclined to believe it’s a combination of both but more the latter)The the ideal opportunity presents itself when I make those two Tweets, involved persons make a meal of the whole thing and report me to the police. Police and prosecution think they have enough evidence to charge me, assuming that once I see the evidence I’ll roll over and plead guilty straight away (See disclosure in future post). Because they think I’ll plead guilty straight away they don’t bother with any follow up investigation.
I appear in court on the 7th November and plead not guilty to the charge, the prosecution is directed by judge to provide full disclosure (because they didn’t) and particularise the charges at the pre-trial scheduled for the 12th December. My bail conditions stipulate that I am not allowed to refer to any councillor directly or by name on any social networking sites at all. (aherm yes, define the legal meaning of a social networking site?)
The two bloggers in Bexley with help from many people in the borough take it upon themselves to show that the prosecution doesn’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to prosecuting me. One of the bloggers publishes all the findings, the other alludes to the new evidence which proves no harassment has taken place. Some of the new evidence points to council servers and rather “mysteriously” that evidence disappears.
I attend court on the 12th December fully expecting to receive full disclosure and to hear the particulars of the charges against me. This is not to be, apparently the prosecutor hasn’t even opened the case file let alone done what was expected of him. We don’t even make the court room, the pre-trial is postponed as the prosecutor is not ready with the case. (I might add at quite a significant financial cost to myself, contrary to popular belief lawyers etc do not come cheap. That’s a top tip from yours truly). Pre-trial is postponed for the 21st December. My legal team opines that we have the prosecutor running in circles and they don’t know what to do. This is heartening news, obviously because from the outset I have always maintained that the harassment charges were a load of bollocks.
At the new pre-trial hearing on the 21st December the prosecution knowing they could never in a million years provide enough evidence at all to prove I harassed anyone, especially after the evidence published by both Bexley bloggers. They decide that there is no case to answer to and to save face decide to prosecute me for grossly malicious communications instead as it is easier to prove than the harassment charge. Easier, but they’ll still have a hell of a time trying to do so. The highlight of the hearing of course was hearing the prosecutor say CUNT, in a full court, in a case where I’m being partly prosecuted for saying the word cunt, on Twitter. I did allow myself a little gigle whilst locked in the glass box.
So the charge changed, I was found not guilty of harassment of any councillor (the prosecution could not make up their mind whether I was harassing one or more councillors)yet my bail conditions remained the same, as if I was still guilty of harassment. Those bail conditions should have been dropped and new ones given.
What would have happened if I hadn’t been at court when they charged me with something new, would I have been arrested again?
So, I digressed somewhat, what implications are there going to be if I am found guilty of malicious communications because of that Tweet? Well imagine for a minute you send an email to a friend, within that email you jokingly talk about how you’d love to super-glue your neighbours postbox shut, because quite frankly they’re a cunt. Your friend opens the email not realising that one of your neighbours friends is standing in the vicinity and they happen to read the email. Your neighbours friend knows who you are and knows you’re a neighbour and skips off to go tell your neighbour. Your neighbour, not even seeing the email, makes a complaint to the police. You are arrested and charged with grossly offensive malicious communications.
It’s probably not the best analogy but I’m sure you’ll get the gist, apply that analogy to your blogging and to your Tweeting, can you see where this could end up? Can you see the implications? Yes I know I posted those Tweets on a public forum, but it wasn’t directed at my victim and the chances any of my followers would have guessed who’s house it was were little to none. The person who “grassed” me up to the victim doesn’t even follow me on Twitter.
Home straight time, the proposed restraining order should I be found guilty. It’s rather scary, some bit are understandable, others aren’t.
1. Not to own, operate or write on a website or social media any criticisms of Bexley council. – This is wrong, the charges that related to Bexley council I was found not guilty of, why would they not want me writing about Bexley Council? Can you guess dear reader? I bet you can.
2. Not to contact the victim directly or indirectly. – Understandable if I’m found guilty.
3. Not to write directly or indirectly about Bexley Councillors on any site. – Wrong again, those charges were dropped I am innocent of harassment.
4. Not to refer to victim directly or indirectly on any site – Understandable if I’m writing about victim in a personal way but he is an elected representative who should be open to scrutiny just like any other elected representative.
When I saw the proposed restraining order I said to my barrister it was a load of bollocks and was way over the top especially since I’d been found not guilty of harassment of Bexley Council. He agreed.
This whole case boils down to two things. Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression and if I’m found guilty, the state is denying me those rights.
The new trial details:
Date: 14th February 2012
Place: Greenwich Magistrates Court
Time: 13:30
Keep an eye out for a Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Expression Flash-mob coming somewhere, sometime soon. Perhaps in Greenwich, perhaps on Valentines Day and perhaps around the midday mark. Perhaps it will be called “Express Your Inner Cunt”
