Malicious Communications: Freedom of Email? Elected Officials, Disability and Expression: R v Casserly [2024] EWCA Crim 25.

This article discusses a case involving malicious communications and freedom of speech. The appellant sent an email to a town councillor, criticizing her abilities and disabilities. He was convicted of sending an offensive communication, but the Court of Appeal allowed his appeal, stating that his right to free speech had been violated. The court outlined three categories of cases where the criminal law interacts with proportionality, and emphasized the importance of considering context and purpose in determining whether a message is "grossly offensive." However, the court did not address the issue of discrimination in the case, which some argue should have been considered. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Journal of Criminal Law is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)