When you or I let out a string of expletives (c'mon - we've all done it!) it's usually because we've just stubbed our toe, had some bad news, are stressed or any number of other minor reasons that affect us all in our everyday lives. Most of the time we're in the privacy of our own homes or with friend or family who we know won't take too much offence (or will take us to task in a relatively relaxed way about it!).
But what about people who swear (usually loudly!) in the street? The issue is even more relevant when a footballer of some repute (and who might be argued to be a role model for thousands of fans) swears directly into a television camera which will clearly be broadcasting to millions.
Of course in that particular situation, the FA has taken some action - in the same way that if I were to swear at a client the Law Society would probably have something to say about it.
But there's an argument that an example should be made in these situations - a sense that public figures who earn millions of pounds and who set their stall out both as role models and as spokespeople for certain brands of food, sporting goods and other merchandise should at least be treated in the same way as you or I would be treated in those circumstances.
So is it against the law to swear?
Well, yes and no.
Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 make it an offence to
(a) use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b) display any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress
There are three defences :-
(a) The defendant had no reason to believe that there was any person within hearing or sight who was likely to be alarmed or distressed by his action.
(b) The defendant was in a dwelling and had no reason to believe that his behaviour would be seen or heard by any person outside any dwelling.
(c) The conduct was reasonable.
So it's OK to swear at home (as long as all your windows aren't open with the local children playing outside) (phew!!) but not in the street in front of old ladies.
In an age, though, where we're becoming more used to (and accepting of!) the use of language which would, even 20 years ago, have been found to be wholly unacceptable by society in general the issue of whether a person is likely to be caused harassment alarm or distress is a bit of a movable feast! Generally speaking the courts apply the test of the "man on the Clapham omnibus" - that is to say whether an "average" person would be offended. Again, though, the "average" person changes as society as a whole changes.
Is it arguable that the millions of people who saw Rooney swear to camera were all likely to be football fans who would be used to, and indeed expect, that sort of behaviour in the heat and excitement of a goal celebration?
Well maybe - but then again the chances of every single person watching the TV at that point being over the age of 18 are, I suspect, slim to none.
And even if the offence has been committed, the level of fine to a footballer who earns what Wayne Rooney earns is far less significant than a ban from playing a game which he clearly lives for - so perhaps the punishment meted out by the FA really does fit the crime in this instance.
There's arguments both ways of course - that Rooney should be subject to the same punishment that you or I would be subject to for swearing at an old lady in the street. Justice should, after all, not discriminate.
I would expect that that won't happen though - just don't use it as an excuse to vent your anger in the local shopping centre next time the queue in M&S is too long!
