World News - Internet revenge husband cleared

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • xman
    Admin
    • Sep 2006
    • 24007

    World News - Internet revenge husband cleared

    17 June 2011 Last updated at 13:11 ET Plumber Ian Pud**** has been cleared of internet harassment after tweeting and blogging details of his wife's affair.

    Mr Pud****, 41, hailed it "a victory for free speech and the small man", following the verdict at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court.

    He had tweeted, blogged and posted videos online after being enraged by his wife's 10-year relationship with company director Timothy Haynes.

    Lawyers think the case may help define the limits of free expression online.

    There were cheers from the public gallery and Mr Pud**** shook his fist and smiled as District Judge Elizabeth Roscoe delivered not-guilty verdicts on two harassment charges at the end of a three-day trial.

    Outside court he said: "For the last 12 months this has taken over my life. Purely and simply there has been an abuse of power. If this can happen to me it can happen to anyone.

    "It is absolutely a victory for free speech and the small man. I'm a plumber and drive around in a Transit."

    Mr Haynes, from Billingshurst, West Sussex, had a 10-year affair with Leena Pud****, which was exposed after her husband read a text message on her mobile phone in 2009.

    'Little nuisance' The court heard details of e-mails and text messages that Mr Haynes had sent her over the course of their affair.

    Mr Haynes lost his job as a director at re-insurance firm, Guy Carpenter, as a result of his affair.

    He admitted he had been "deceitful" but said Mr Pud**** should have taken up his anger with him alone rather than launching a "campaign of harassment against him".

    But on Friday, defence lawyer Michael Wolkind QC, representing Mr Pud****, said: "All Ian Pud**** tried was to be a little nuisance. The little nuisance value of the little man."

    BBC legal affairs correspondent Clive Coleman said the case "points up the issue of whether someone freely expressing themselves widely online can be guilty of harassment".

    He added: "As with jurors using Facebook, and people tweeting details of privacy injunctions, the law and the internet are working out their growing and not especially comfortable relationship."





    Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin | Settlement Statement | WordPress Tutorials
Working...
X