[International] A misjudged tweet can frankly wreck a trial: Attorney General for UK on “Think before you Post” campaign

Recently, the Attorney General’s Office in the UK issued guidelines pertaining to the issue of contempt of court through social media. The directions state the kind of behaviour on social media that could be considered as contempt of court.

Explaining the meaning of contempt of court, the guidelines state that “Contempt of court refers to behaviour that undermines or prejudices court proceedings and interferes with the administration of justice, or creates a real risk of that happening. The same rules apply to members of the public as they do to journalists, especially when posting on social media.”

The guidelines also mention the consequences of contempt of court. “Contempt of court can be punished by a fine or up to two years in prison.”

The guidelines come as part of the “Think before you post” campaign that has been launched this week by the Attorney General, Michael Ellis QC. The campaign has been launched in an effort to tackle the emerging instances of social media posts being in “contempt of court”. The campaign seeks to spread a warning message against posting of prejudicial material on social media. Using #thinkbeforeyoupost, the Attorney General’s office will also circulate the cautionary instances of contempt of court convictions.

The guidelines also warn against instances that could constitute contempt of court. As mentioned in the guidelines,

“Posting about a case or upcoming trial on social media could amount to contempt of court if it:

• Comments on facts or evidence that will be heard during the trial.

• Mentions the defendant’s previous convictions or character.

• Names someone in breach of an injunction or court order.

• Names victims, witnesses, and offenders under the age of 18.

• Names a victim of a sex crime.

• Shares any information about a case that the judge has ordered to be kept private.

• Records and/or shares images, video content, or sound clips from the trial.

• Publishes a court judgment in breach of an embargo.”

Citing a few examples of posts that would be considered as contempt of court, the guidelines also give a cautionary statement that

“Think before you post – could your message stop someone having their day in court? Everyone is innocent until proven guilty – juries must decide on the basis of evidence, not your posts. We all have a right to talk about what we see, hear, and read in the news – but make sure you know how to stay on the right side of the law. Your post could mean a trial is delayed or stopped because a fair trial isn’t possible – don’t get in the way of justice being done.”

Case studies

The Attorney General’s office has also released four case studies wherein the content on social media hindered the trial, as well as, instances wherein contempt of court proceedings had been initiated.

a. D&F

In a trial of two teenage girls, their identities were subsequently revealed. This trial of 2015, related to murder of Angela Wrightson was delayed after hundreds of posts claimed to reveal their identity. Aborting the trial caused lost of tens of thousands of pounds and led to justice being delayed. Defendants were later found guilty in a reconstituted trial.

b. TM and Thompson & Venables

As mentioned in the case study released, “In March 2019, TM was found guilty of contempt of court after she published information and photographs online purporting to be of Jon Venables.”

Court had restricted publication of any material related to the defendants of the case. When the material was published, “TM initially claimed that she had no idea that it was against the law to post the images. She pleaded guilty at her trial and was sentenced to 8 months in prison, suspended for 2 years. She was also ordered to pay costs of £10,000.”

In similar proceedings, eight other people were found in contempt of court against the said order.

c. KM

In trial related to KM’s relatives, the court had passed an order restricting anyone to name or identify the two witnesses in the proceedings.

KM contravening such order posted videos and photos from the trial. The content identified the two witnesses on Facebook.

As stated in the case study, “KM was later found in contempt of court and given a 12-week prison sentence, suspended for two years and ordered to pay £2,000 in costs.”

d. EH

In 2019, EH streamed more than an hour of footage of court proceedings from her partner’s trial, on Facebook. This was done despite signs against any recording of the proceedings, in the crown’s court. The court, during her trial held that she was guilty since she was warned against any recording, a week before the trial.

As stated in the case study, “In February 2021, she was sentenced to a four-month prison term, suspended for two years, and ordered to pay £500 in costs, after being found in contempt of court.”

Statements from the Attorney General

While launching the campaign on June 28, 2021, the Attorney General has also tweeted that “Everyone is innocent until proven guilty and everyone deserves a fair trial. It is vital a jury makes a decision based on the evidence presented in court and not on information from the news or online. Do you know what you can and can’t post online? #ThinkBeforeYouPost”

The tweet also contained a video by the Attorney General. Reiterating the importance of a fair trial he said that “…the trial has to be based on evidence and not on information that is wrong and incomplete.” He added that “…the campaign has been launched to help educate people and to warn people of the dangers of posting irresponsibly online. A misjudged tweet or post can frankly wreck a trial. It can cause proceedings to be abandoned, delayed, and that will not only have cost implications, but it will mean the witnesses would have to go through giving all of their evidence again, and of course, defendants may be left having to wait for a long period of time before their case can be heard again. So these rules are in place to make sure that we protect the integrity of our judicial system.”

While acknowledging the right to express, he also stated that “… we have to stay within the rules.”

Accordingly, he urged everyone to “#thinkbeforeyoupost.”