10 Dec 12 | minipost, News and features, United Kingdom
Section 5 of the 1986 Public Order Act could be adjusted to remove the word “insulting” from legislation, it was announced today (10 December). Director of public prosecutions Keir Starmer has said that past cases could be classified as “abusive”, as opposed to “insulting”. Section 5 has stirred controversy in the past: in 2010, a Christian preacher was charged with a public order offence for telling a police officer homosexuality was “a sin”. A Home Office spokesman told the Telegraph that it had “consulted on removing ‘insulting’ from the Act and was considering the responses.” The House of Lords will take a vote on the matter on Wednesday (12 December).
11 Oct 12 | Asia and Pacific, Index Index, minipost, News and features, United Kingdom
A man has been sentenced to a total of eight months in prison by a Manchester court for wearing a T-shirt daubed with offensive comments referring the murders of PC Fiona Bone and PC Nicola Hughes.
Barry Thew, of Radcliffe, Greater Manchester admitted to a Section 4A Public Order Offence today (11 October) for wearing the T-shirt, on which he had written the messages ”One less pig; perfect justice” and “killacopforfun.com haha”.
Inspector Bryn Williams, of the Radcliffe Neighbourhood Policing Team, said: “To mock or joke about the tragic events of that morning is morally reprehensible and Thew has rightly been convicted and sentenced for his actions.”
Thew had been reported to police after wearing the article around three-and-a-half hours after the officers were shot dead in Greater Manchester on 2 October.
UPDATE: According to the Manchester Evening News, four months of Thew’s sentence was handed down for breach of a previous suspended sentence
Also this week
08 October 2012 | Man jailed for offensive Facebook comments about missing schoolgirl
09 October 2012 | Yorkshire man sentenced over offensive Twitter comments directed at soldiers
10 Aug 12 | Uncategorized
Index on Censorship has not exactly been shy in its criticism of the control-freakish atmosphere of the Olympics. Nor have we held back criticisms of the misuse and abuse of the UK’s Public Order Act.
So you would have thought that the story of Mark Worsfold, allegedly arrested for looking a bit glum at the Olympic cycling road race would have been something we would have jumped on. Mr Worsfold, a martial arts instructor, has difficulty moving his facial muscles due to Parkinson’s disease.
But there seemed something not quite right about the national papers’ reporting of the whole thing — partly down to Worsfold’s own apparent hesitance to criticise the police — the local paper reported that despite his five hours in custody, Mr Worsfold was keen to see the “funny side” of the incident.
Over at Harry’s Place, blogger amie has an interesting take on what happened, claimed to be based on a chance meeting with Mark Worsfold’s brother at the Olympic Park in London. Amie says the following is Worsfold’s brother’s account of the arrest:
Mark had served in Northern Ireland and appreciates full well the stresses involved in assessing responses in tense situations. He was concerned that the newspaper reports (It was in the Guardian as well) were reflecting this as a case of police brutality which, if the full background were known, it would be apparent it was not.
The group of protesters near where he was standing were from Fathers 4 Justice [groan from my Family Law lecturer sister sitting alongside me]. To make matters worse, a woman protester next to him trying to join the other demonstrators and who was haranguing the police as imperialist lackeys, etc, looked as if she was with him.
“This is all going to kick off” he thought, and he needed to get to his daughter’s birthday. With that he jumped off the wall to leave. Bad move, worse timing, open to misinterpretation. When he was jumped on, he tried to say he had been to a Taekwondo demonstration and needed to get to his daughter. What the police heard, in the presumably noisy environment, (said the brother), was “demonstration” and “getting to his daughter” — a reasonable impression of a Father 4 justice with access issues.
He would be grateful if I could convey to others a more rounded perspective.
This version of events certainly doesn’t mean Mr Worsfold isn’t owed an apology, or that our Public Order Act is not misused ridiculously and sometimes disturbingly. But it’s useful, nevertheless, to put reporting of the exercise of Public Order powers in context.
09 Nov 10 | News and features
My Australian countrymen are a frank species. Compare and contrast the mealymouthed slogan used in a UK road safety campaign, “never EVER drink and drive” with the robust tagline used in my home state, “If you drink, then drive, you’re a bloody idiot.”
Unusually Hampshire Police have intervened in this cultural divide warning a local mechanic he could face prosecution for advertising an Australian engine starter called Start Ya Bastard — and yes it is a real product.
Nick Palmer, who sells the spray, has a large advert for the product on his van and has been told by police he could face prosecution for a Public Order offence; presumably a section five offence using abusive or insulting words that could cause harassment, alarm or distress. According to Metro, where I spotted the story, Hampshire police said: “If a complaint were to be received it could be regarded as an offence.”
Surely there is an obligation to treat such complaints with a little commonsense? What percentage of the public are alarmed and distressed by the word?
