Malicious email / police involved
Discussion
Gareth79 said:
Bigends said:
Anonymous or not you aren't allowed to email porn it's a malicious communications offence especially now the recipient has made a complaint
You are most certainly allowed to email porn, the problem in the OP's son's case is that the recipient believed it was done maliciously. ie. to cause them offence/embarassment. ie. If it was a video of some random girl there wouldn't be any problem (edit: so long as the OP's son didn't know that would cause offence). Likewise I think assuming it was a professional video if it was a link to the website with some text like "this is your sister, she's a complete [offensive words]" it would probably be the same offence.
I think it will come down to what was also in the email. If it said nothing then I can't see it being easy to prove maliciousness. If it said something then what was said would be crucial.
Likewise as mentioned the circumstances of the video would matter. If it was on a public website with her permission then I'd be surprised if much was a result of it, even if the email was distasteful.
Your son should have done what the rest of his mates did, keep it on the low down and have a laugh behind his back.
Sometimes doing the right thing isn't always the right thing to do.
Edited by BlueHave on Sunday 22 October 03:05
BlueHave said:
If the consenting middle aged adult on webcam is stupid enough to think that friggin themselves off on a webcam site isn't going to be viewed by someone in their town that will be a friend of a friend then they shouldn't be allowed to own a computer.
Your son should have done what the rest of his mates did, keep it on the low down and have a laugh behind his back.
Sometimes doing the right thing isn't always the right thing to do.
And the man in the canoe is going to be dead shrivelled anyway bit like a pruneYour son should have done what the rest of his mates did, keep it on the low down and have a laugh behind his back.
Sometimes doing the right thing isn't always the right thing to do.
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 22 October 03:05
The anonymous aspect is presumably why he's spoke to the police. IANAL but if your son explains his (fairly reasonable) side of the story and this is presented to the friend then there's no malicious case to answer and the friend will likely understand. I can imagine the friend will have had this coming at him on all fronts so an anonymous email stands out as an easy target to investigate.
There is a separate offence under the Communications Act 2003. Sending a message that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character is an offence. The test for "grossly offensive" is whether the message would cause gross offence to those to whom it relates.
The defendant must either intend the message to be grossly offensive, indecent or obscene or at least be aware that it was so. This can be inferred from the terms of the message or from the defendant's knowledge of the likely recipient
The defendant must either intend the message to be grossly offensive, indecent or obscene or at least be aware that it was so. This can be inferred from the terms of the message or from the defendant's knowledge of the likely recipient
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 22 October 07:35
Porn would not certainly be grossly offensive. Some people are offended by porn, others are not. The provision still requires intent - there is case law to that effect that you have perhaps overlooked.
Your interpretation would prevent anyone ever sending a tsext, and that is not the intent or effect of the legislation. Context is everything and intent is important.
Your interpretation would prevent anyone ever sending a tsext, and that is not the intent or effect of the legislation. Context is everything and intent is important.
Pica-Pica said:
OddCat said:
And they say police resources are limited and that they can only now deal with serious crime.......
What!? This sounds serious enough to investigate to me. Or do you think it is all a giggle?Middle aged woman makes porn video. Is in public domain. Bloke let's his mate know about said video as the woman in the video is this mates sister. Yeah, right. Massive crime there.
I'd rather plod spent the time trying to find the b
rds who broke into my garage recently and stole my tools. Unsurprisingly, I didnt CONSENT to that....
It was written in a jokey way as in 'check what your sisters doing' with a screen shot attached of her face.
My sons reasoning for this was:
1) He wanted to try and stay out of it and so that his other mates wouldnt of said he had been a 'grass' etc
2) He knew if if put something direct like 'Jane is doing this and Fred and the rest of the gang have been laughing behind your back about it, i think you should check it out - then he would of got jip off the rest of his mates as they told him not to say anything.
All in hindsight of course he should of just done the right thing and told him directly or even better just stay out of it all.
My sons reasoning for this was:
1) He wanted to try and stay out of it and so that his other mates wouldnt of said he had been a 'grass' etc
2) He knew if if put something direct like 'Jane is doing this and Fred and the rest of the gang have been laughing behind your back about it, i think you should check it out - then he would of got jip off the rest of his mates as they told him not to say anything.
All in hindsight of course he should of just done the right thing and told him directly or even better just stay out of it all.
The Spruce goose said:
When you went into the police station did you have a duty solicitor as well with you? What did they advise?
Yes had solicitor, both the police and solicitor said he was all a bit bizarre and after he explained himself both the solicitor and police could see why he had done it. Solicitor said he didnt think anything would come of it.dave7108 said:
It was written in a jokey way as in 'check what your sisters doing' with a screen shot attached of her face.
My sons reasoning for this was:
1) He wanted to try and stay out of it and so that his other mates wouldnt of said he had been a 'grass' etc
2) He knew if if put something direct like 'Jane is doing this and Fred and the rest of the gang have been laughing behind your back about it, i think you should check it out - then he would of got jip off the rest of his mates as they told him not to say anything.
All in hindsight of course he should of just done the right thing and told him directly or even better just stay out of it all.
Eh... So now its gone from:My sons reasoning for this was:
1) He wanted to try and stay out of it and so that his other mates wouldnt of said he had been a 'grass' etc
2) He knew if if put something direct like 'Jane is doing this and Fred and the rest of the gang have been laughing behind your back about it, i think you should check it out - then he would of got jip off the rest of his mates as they told him not to say anything.
All in hindsight of course he should of just done the right thing and told him directly or even better just stay out of it all.
1) Hey someone sent me this from XXXX porn site, it contains your sister, I thought you might like to know about it as you are her brother.
to
2) A "jokey" check what your sister is doing!!
That's not what you just said originally and does not quite sound like 1) anymore and a bit more like kicking dirt in brothers face.
I suspect that the OP's son has not been frank with the OP, and may have behaved quite badly and at the least unwisely. Having said that, the likelihood of a prosecution may not be high. There would be the problem of proving intent, coupled with the public interest test. Frank and open co-operation and contrition might be a good strategy at this point. The best advice is not always the advice to clam up.
Hold on. I'm sorry but this is getting mental...
No matter how the womans brother found out, or who told him, the fact remains that he has been directed to something that is in the public domain.
Maybe he thought his sister was an angel. Maybe it has 'hurt his feelings' to see his sister doing that (mind you, given what it is supposed to have said in the text accompanying the message, he could always gave NOT followed the link / opened the attachment)
Talk about shooting the messenger !!
Bit radical I know but maybe the bloke should have a word with his sister !!!!
Jezzzz..
No matter how the womans brother found out, or who told him, the fact remains that he has been directed to something that is in the public domain.
Maybe he thought his sister was an angel. Maybe it has 'hurt his feelings' to see his sister doing that (mind you, given what it is supposed to have said in the text accompanying the message, he could always gave NOT followed the link / opened the attachment)
Talk about shooting the messenger !!
Bit radical I know but maybe the bloke should have a word with his sister !!!!
Jezzzz..
The Spruce goose said:
OddCat said:
^^^^^^ this
i;m not sure, if a porno video of a sibling was sent to me , anonymously, then i might be offended by it, i mean its not normal behavior is it? most would just say it on the net, not the actual video.OddCat said:
You might not like it. The realization that your sister would do such a thing well might be a bit of a shock. But would you go to the police. Really ?
The thing is it was sent anonymously, so maybe, but we don't know the true context of the message. I am surprised he(the friend) continued with pressing charges. even after finding out it was his friend. Without all the facts, it hard to know the real reasons.Edited by The Spruce goose on Sunday 22 October 12:32
Just to clarify the above, my son didnt tell him that he sent the email. The receiver told everyone he was going to the police and my son at this point probably crapped his pants.
In hindsight he should of said at this point, may have stopped all this happening and limited damage.
He hasnt spoken to his friend yet on the police's advice. The police are due to speak to this chap in the next day or so to see what he wants to do in relation to continuing it. The police spoke to him last week then said they will call him in 7 days to speak again. The policeman said on the phone that he was hoping the chap would 'have time to think it over and calm down' so from our point of view and the police's we are hoping he will change his mind once he has time to mull it over.
The policeman seems a very reasonable man and probably wants this all closed off.
In hindsight he should of said at this point, may have stopped all this happening and limited damage.
He hasnt spoken to his friend yet on the police's advice. The police are due to speak to this chap in the next day or so to see what he wants to do in relation to continuing it. The police spoke to him last week then said they will call him in 7 days to speak again. The policeman said on the phone that he was hoping the chap would 'have time to think it over and calm down' so from our point of view and the police's we are hoping he will change his mind once he has time to mull it over.
The policeman seems a very reasonable man and probably wants this all closed off.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff