Aditya Verma

[Andrew Zigmond]

I suggest you read this:

https://www.channel4.com/producers-hand ... dice-rules

It is clear from the above that in no way is this case 'sub judice' in the UK as yet.

The "yet" being the critical point. To be fair there is a distinction between specific legal requirements and standard convention. A case in point (and obviously not applicable in this instance) is that if a minor is arrested for a crime they can be named until such time as they are charged and a reporting restriction is imposed; however the vast majority of publications don't do so. In the same way I have noticed that comments are generally not accepted on articles relating to a current criminal investigation even though no charges have yet been brought.

[Mick Norris]

Sounds like they will have their fingers crossed the National High Court bats the case back to the UK. Does anyone know how long the court process is likely to take in Spain?

It’s pretty much in all the online papers now; https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/53ed ... 937a799b17

It does seem a bit of a nonsense that a little bit of discussion on an obscure forum is going to prejudice a fair trial when the story is already in every news outlet in the country more or less.

I don't dare read the online comments in these publications for the sake of my blood pressure but I suspect there is a lot of abuse in there bordering on racism (which incidentally is the reason many older chess players are taking sick glee in it). However if it was sub judice in the UK they would have to close off comments due to the risk of violating contempt of court laws - that risk still stands even in a relatively unread forum such as this one.

Andrew, you seem to be suggesting that many older chess players are racist, or am I misreading this? I'd like a clarification on that point please

Thanks
Mick

[Matt Mackenzie]

Have to say, that is very much not my personal experience (even if I don't personally count as "older" given that I was born in 1966)

Of course, there will always be exceptions......

[Carl Hibbard]

Seems I am not even receiving moderation report emails and to be honest no idea why

[Carl Hibbard]

This subject of discussion will remain open for now. I have, however, left the reports open so that Carl can also look at it and see if he thinks if it should be closed.

For now I am allowing the thread to continue as this is very much in public domain at this point.

[Carl Hibbard]

This thread has been flagged to Carl who has not yet responded to my earlier request for moderation.

For now people should email me if needed not sure why notifications are not working.

[Jonathan Bryant]

“Chess makes you smarter”, does it?

I wonder if it makes people less smart

Or am I just cynical about my interactions with chess players?

To borrow something from - if memory serves - Bill Hartston.

Chess doesn't make people less smart. Less smart people make chess their game.

[Matt Bridgeman]

The Times print edition suggests that the message was flagged because he used the British airport - presumably London Gatwick - WiFi to send the Snapchat message to his friends. But later it’s the Spanish who have incurred the £86,000 expense in scrambling two fighter jets to intercept. Must be a fair chance the case will get back to England at some point over the summer. Although how long he will be stuck in Spain without a passport answering bail every two weeks seems a bit unknown.

[Nick Burrows]

the message was flagged because he used the British airport - presumably London Gatwick - WiFi to send the Snapchat message to his friends.

It's understandable that he thought his joke was safe to send as Snapchat is usually encrypted. He now knows that it's not at airports! What a horrible mess to find yourself in.

[Neill Cooper]

It’s frightening how quickly social media can come back to bite you on the arse these days. Potentially a £100,000 plus elite private education spaffed up the wall with a ten word snapchat to friends. A cautionary tale unfolding.

Note that Aditya attended St Olaves, a state school.

[Matt Bridgeman]

It’s frightening how quickly social media can come back to bite you on the arse these days. Potentially a £100,000 plus elite private education spaffed up the wall with a ten word snapchat to friends. A cautionary tale unfolding.

Note that Aditya attended St Olaves, a state school.

I must have been looking at the Prep School. If it comes back to the UK the offence that might fit is Improper use of Public Electronic Communications Network (section 127 Communications Act 2003). Other offences don’t really fit as he lacks the intention to commit an actual bomb hoax. But with the above offence the ‘menacing’ content of the message would be a points to prove fit for the prosecutor. Upto 6 months imprisonment (unlikely) and/or an unlimited fine (hefty!). But it would be a criminal conviction with the attached headaches for travel abroad, university, jobs etc.

[Nick Burrows]

It would be a great injustice if this led to a criminal conviction, and highly doubt that will happen. It was a joke sent to his friends on what he thought was a private channel.

[Matt Bridgeman]

It would be a great injustice if this led to a criminal conviction, and highly doubt that will happen. It was a joke sent to his friends on what he thought was a private channel.

There might be some caselaw about when you use unsecured WiFi it enters the public domain? I’m really not sure.

[Jonathan Bryant]

... sent to his friends on what he thought was a private channel.

Reminder that there's no need to speculate on what the law does or doesn't say*. It's all readily available online.

e.g.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/20 ... ection/127

Where you see the relevant phrase of the Act referenced is "public electronic communications network".


"Private channel" - let alone the belief thereof - doesn't appear at all so is irrelevant.


Incidentally the defence you propose - joke sent to private groups of friends - did not work out too well for the guy who sent bonfire night videos about Grenfell.

https://news.met.police.uk/news/man-con ... rnt-446343

a couple of months ago.


Whether you're right about the likelihood/injustice of any future conviction is an entirely separate question.






* interpreting Acts of Parliament / understanding what they mean is obviously not as straightforward

[Nick Burrows]

I don't doubt that they have the power to convict, but I would hope and think that a young man with a promising future ahead of him, no previous convictions who sent a joke in bad taste to what he believed was a private channel with zero intent to provoke alarm would be treated accordingly.
I am quite sure he has already learnt a very painful lesson.