I am pleased to publish in full District Judge John Zani’s brilliant Judgement (and delighted to confirm that he is a fellow Old Cholmeleian). The case is a fascinating one, involving as it does online antisemitism; freedom of speech, particularly online; the definition of ‘grossly offensive’ as opposed to just ‘offensive’; and an Act (the Communications Act 2003) which has been amended to cover the Internet (section 127). The Campaign Against Antisemitism deserves thanks for pressuring the CPS to take the case on and the CPS (especially their barrister Karen Robinson) likewise deserves recognition for their excellence in prosecuting the case.
Sentencing will be on 14 June (after the Judge has received a Probation Report).
Judge Zani rules that Chabloz DID both ‘send’ and ’cause to be sent’ the songs:
Judge Zani rules that the Internet IS a ‘public electronic communications network’:
Judge Zani considers the difference between ‘offensive’ and ‘grossly offensive’:
Evidence from CAA – Note that only part of the IHRA Definition is quoted in the Judgement – Both agree that the ‘songs’ are ‘grossly offensive’. NB It’s Stephen Silverman not Sidney.
NB – M’Bala is the real name of Dieudonné…. Chabloz stated that she ‘did not intend to cause offence’ !!!! And denies the Holocaust
No, the case isn’t about the legality of Holocaust Denial (qua Adam Wagner) … It’s about ‘gross offence’.