A North Yorkshire citizen journalist has been convicted of sending a menacing email to local councillors, in which he said he looked forward to their execution being televised.
Timothy Thorne, 53, of Scarborough, was convicted of an offence under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 at a trial at Scarborough Magistrates' Court on Friday, 25th March 2022.
Under section 127(1)(a) of the Act it is an offence to send by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character. The maximum penalty on summary conviction is 26 weeks' custody and/or an unlimited fine.
By way of context, Thorne is a prominent local citizen journalist and political activist.
He runs the North Yorks Enquirer website, which describes itself as holding public authorities to account. He has previously stood as a UKIP candidate in the Scarborough Borough Council elections.
Magistrates heard that Thorne had sent the email in question to Councillors Lyn Healing and Mike Stathers on Monday, 14th June 2021. Both are members of East Riding of Yorkshire Council.
The email had the subject line: "Tory planning fiasco time to admit failure".
Thorne, who admitted being "angry" and "disappointed" with the Government's handling of coronavirus restrictions, expressed his disdain for the Conservatives in response.
During the email, Thorne claimed the party had "generally fucked up the UK and making life miserable for the population".
He added: "I can say I'll never vote for your stupid, globalist, socialist policies. You have to be the most inept bunch of politicians the UK has ever known."
He concluded: "I look forward to when capital punishment is repealed (sic) and we can start executing you useless c**ts on pay-per-view TV."
Thorne signed off the email: "Tim Thorne, North Yorks Enquirer".
Giving evidence, Thorne denied any intention of making his response grossly offensive.
He told the court his purpose of sending it had been "to get a reply" and he was "very angry at the time about coronavirus. The whole thing had been a disaster. I just think it wouldn't have got to that stage and councillors should straighten up. It's complete nonsense."
Thorne said he believed that by "speaking out" local councillors "can influence policy higher up."
He added: "I wasn't very happy at the time and was trying to get my point across. It was driven by the Government and was so frustrating."
Having considered the evidence carefully, Magistrates were of the opinion that the elements of the offence had been made out.
Announcing the court's decision Janet Scotcher-Husband, Presiding Justice, said: "I believe the terms used in the email, including c**ts and execution, are grossly offensive and are to any reasonable person offensive.
"He ought to have been aware that it would have been grossly offensive."
Thorne was fined £1,641.
He was also ordered to pay £620 towards prosecution costs, £164 surcharge and £100 in compensation to each councillor.
Speaking after the trial, Councillor Stathers said: "I don't know this man, he doesn't know me, he doesn't live in my area, how can someone wish for any elected member, because they are Conservative, to be slaughtered on TV?
"It's the most appalling thing sent to me in years."
Councillor Stathers said online abuse against those elected is "becoming much more prevalent".
He added: "People need to be identified and punished. I would say to all elected members or anyone in a public position to be aware of these people and take action.
"This will give a very strong and clear message to anyone out there who thinks they can sit at a keyboard and send such emails to people."
3 comments:
Definitely worth an appeal to the Crown Court. He is entitled, and has a right to be offensive. What has been reported seems fairly tame, and I struggle to see how it is GROSSLY offensive, especially to interfere with his right to freedom of speech.
I also very much doubt it was especially menacing, given that the phrase used is fairy common, especially when discussing politics.
I think the bench has got this one wrong, and in any event, that sentence is completely disproportionate, even for a trial.
It's always difficult to tell from newspaper reports, but I have to say that I too would consider the comments reported to fall under the limb of being "indecent, obscene or menacing". As for the sentence, it does seem quite a large fine. I would suggest that the bench has imposed maybe a band D fine in place of a community order. Again, given the limited reporting it is difficult to tell. As for an appeal, of course that is the right of anyone convicted in the Magistrates' Court.
The kind of language used in the emails is not acceptable and I think we must not accept this kind of behaviour. He is free to disagree with the councillors and criticise, but not to abuse and threaten them.
Post a Comment