The UK's Orwellian Anti-Terror Laws

HatoftheRabbit

This just popped up on my twitter feed a few minutes ago: http://wp.me/p1PM8M-3c

Basically a guy was convicted in the UK back in 2011 for selling CDs full of terrorist manuals online, even though they were legally purchasable from different sources. It raised for me the question of whether prohibiting the possession and dissemination of such information is practical anymore, due to the internet - and even whether such laws have any moral value.

I found the CPS statement particularly infuriating:

The law is clear that it is a crime to gather this information without a reasonable excuse or to disseminate material which is clearly intended to be of use to terrorists. A person’s intentions or motivation for doing this is irrelevant. What is significant is the fact you have this material in your possession, or distribute it, and that it can be useful to someone with a terrorist purpose.

Since when did intention and motivation become irrelevant?

Strangely enough, apart from the two links in the blogger's article, there's very little information on that case available over the internet! Nothing on the Guardian, Telegraph, Times etc.

What do you think?

ResearchWill

HatoftheRabbit wrote: »

This just popped up on my twitter feed a few minutes ago: http://wp.me/p1PM8M-3c

Basically a guy was convicted in the UK back in 2011 for selling CDs full of terrorist manuals online, even though they were legally purchasable from different sources. It raised for me the question of whether prohibiting the possession and dissemination of such information is practical anymore, due to the internet - and even whether such laws have any moral value.

I found the CPS statement particularly infuriating:


Since when did intention and motivation become irrelevant?

Strangely enough, apart from the two links in the blogger's article, there's very little information on that case available over the internet! Nothing on the Guardian, Telegraph, Times etc.

What do you think?

Did a bit of searching, Terence Riy Brown from what I can tell was convicted of nine counts and given 3 years, on the 11th March 2011. There was an appeal heard 10th November 2011, Brown [2011] EWCA Crim 2751, I can't get the full report, this is all I can get so far,

An example: R v Brown 2011 EWCA Crim 2751, 2012 2 Cr App R (S) 10 (p 39) (LCJ D was convicted nine offences of collecting or making a record useful to a terrorist (2 years concurrent), two counts of selling or distributing terrorist material (3 years concurrent). He produced and sold material via his website containing information relating to the preparation of explosives, bombs and poisons running to tens of thousands of pages. Very large scale. Committed over a number of years for financial reward. Sold 2,000 disks to 32 countries. Aged 48 at appeal. One conviction for eight copyright offences. Not motivated by ideological beliefs. 3 years was not arguably manifestly excessive.)


I wonder if he had political motivation, would his right to free speech argument have won then.

HatoftheRabbit

Meaning that if he was honest in his desire to blow people up, it would be fine...

MagicSean

HatoftheRabbit wrote: »

Meaning that if he was honest in his desire to blow people up, it would be fine...

Unlikely.