You’re not singing anymore! – the Chabloz judgement

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).

ch1ch2

ch3

ch4

 

ch5

 

ch6

 

ch7

 

ch8

Judge Zani rules that Chabloz DID both ‘send’ and ’cause to be sent’ the songs:

ch9

ch10

ch11

Judge Zani rules that the Internet IS  a ‘public electronic communications network’:

ch12

Judge Zani considers the difference between ‘offensive’ and ‘grossly offensive’:

ch13

 

ch14

ch15

 

ch16

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.

ch17

Chabloz evidence:

ch18

NB – M’Bala is the real name of Dieudonné…. Chabloz stated that she ‘did not intend to cause offence’ !!!! And denies the Holocaust

ch19

ch20

ch21

ch22

No, the case isn’t about the legality of Holocaust Denial (qua Adam Wagner) … It’s about ‘gross offence’.
ch wagner

ch23

 

ch24

Advertisements