Julian Assange bail hearing makes legal history with Twitter ruling - Polidicks

[img]http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01785/assange620_1785388c.jpg[/img][img]http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01785/tweet_1785657c.jpg[/img] The district judge hearing the bail application from Julian Assange, the Wikileaks founder, made an unusual form of legal history allowing live updates to be sent from his court on the website Twitter. Howard Riddle, the Chief Magistrate, agreed that reporters could send the short messages, known as “Tweets” as long as they did so "quietly" and "did not disturb" the court. Although there is no central rule banning the use of mobile phones in court, in practice they are prohibited during hearings in the same way that television cameras and recording equipment are not allowed. But it emerged that senior judges are “actively considering” whether courts should allow Tweets. It follows comments from the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, in a lecture in Belfast last month in which he openly pondered an easing of restrictions. “If it is possible to file a story via email from a laptop in court, then why is Twitter any different?" he asked. On the other hand tape-recordings are prohibited by statute. “Why is Twitter in the form of text-based transmission of material from court any different?” A spokesman for the judiciary said: “The questions raised by the Lord Chief Justice in his recent lecture regarding the use of Twitter and the principles of open justice are under active consideration by the senior judiciary.” [url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8202262/WikiLeaks-Julian-Assange-bail-hearing-makes-legal-history-with-Twitter-ruling.html]Source[/url]

I hope someday we can get live video streams from within courtrooms. Howard Riddle, related to tom?

[QUOTE=Pepsi-cola;26700817]I hope someday we can get live video streams from within courtrooms. Howard Riddle, related to tom?[/QUOTE] The Pirate bay already tried to do that.

It shouldn't be allowed without the consent of all participating parties. Really, it shouldn't be treated any different than any other form of media or communication.

If you read through the 2 or 3 people who were doing it's tweets you can get an interesting picture. Its a crazy level of coverage of a court hearing that you just don't get in the UK. Little things like this "Only newspaper #Assange is allowed in prison is Daily Express - Robertson QC #wikileaks. " (that is just cruel) are not mentioned in the news because its not newsworthy but for someone tweeting it doesn't matter that its not really newsworthy. [editline]15th December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Biotoxsin;26700864]It shouldn't be allowed without the consent of all participating parties. Really, it shouldn't be treated any different than any other form of media or communication.[/QUOTE] Laws regarding this sort of thing in the UK seem a bit confusing, recording in any form (audio, video, even photographs) is forbidden but written reports are fine so and the use of electronics is fine with permission apparently so twitter doesn't appear to be any different. Also as an example of how confusing and bizarre they are "Visual sketches of court proceedings require the artist to leave the room, and rely on their memory, before they can put pen to paper."

This should be used in all cases. [i]Just convicted of killing 5 babies, officially a #serialkiller now horray haha found not guilty of arson sum1 find me map of churches & gas guilty of organized crime? vinnie, my lawyer: john smith 123 elm st. wife is home[/i]

Well, seeing as how indirect records (writing, drawings, and such) have always been allowed, I don't see why this is any different.

[QUOTE=ASmellyOgreV2;26701057]Well, seeing as how indirect records (writing, drawings, and such) have always been allowed, I don't see why this is any different.[/QUOTE] The only difference that could be important in any way is the fact that its a live way of communicating, but there doesn't seem to actually say that you can't communicate via text from a court. The Guardian article on the same news story says that journalists have been ignoring the "no texting" rule by hiding their phones while they are sending reports to their employers. So perhaps they are just accepting the inevitable. I guess its also good for those who want a transparent justice system, people quoting people as they speak is pretty transparent.

[QUOTE=Jsm;26700893] "Visual sketches of court proceedings require the artist to leave the room, and rely on their memory, before they can put pen to paper."[/QUOTE] Can't say that makes much sense for accuracy's sake. That one savantoid kid who remembers images and can draw them perfectly later on has a future.

"Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge" What a fitting name.

[QUOTE=Badal;26702010]"Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge" What a fitting name.[/QUOTE] wow I just looked him up, I thought "Lord Judge" was a title, not his name. What an absolutely brilliant name for the position he is in.