Highly offensive and threatening anonymous text
Highly offensive and threatening anonymous text
Author
Discussion

srebbe64

Original Poster:

13,021 posts

267 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
Dunno if anyone can help but a member of my family (a minor) received a highly offensive and threatening text. It was read to me and I was appalled. The person then deleted it. We don't even know the number. Two questions:

1) Has a criminal offence been committed?
2) If so what can be done?

I spoke to the police and they weren't helpful other than saying the person concerned should change their number. I would like to progress things because the content of the text was very sinister.

MrBarry123

6,108 posts

151 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
Delete.

Forget.

I'll get the correct number next time.

biggrin

Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

158 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
Potentially, Offence under the Malicious Communications Act. That's if it really is obscene, as some people's opinion on what is, can differ.
Any idea who the sender is? Tracking it down may well be an issue, especially if it's a PAYG.

paintman

7,860 posts

220 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/27/sectio...

Going to be difficult going ahead with anything as the evidence has been destroyed.
Can you even be sure the recipient was the intended target?

Edited by paintman on Wednesday 29th April 17:26

elanfan

5,527 posts

257 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
The evidence will still be on the providers servers which can be accessed by the police with various permissions etc.

It could have been a random message from a random so unless there was anything in the text that identified the recipient I wouldn't worry about it. It could just have been kids messing around sending the same message to any old number. If there were to be a repeat I think that's the time to get serious!

carreauchompeur

18,331 posts

234 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
Offence under malicious communications act.

The fact it's been deleted makes it practically impossible to investigate.

Forget and move on.

anonymous-user

84 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
People communicate with one another in such a manner thousands of times per day. Unless it's persistent / corroborated with other factors / any other aspect that suggests there's actual risk, it's not likely to progress other than what you've been told.

killsta

1,845 posts

258 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
La Liga said:
People communicate with one another in such a manner thousands of times per day. Unless it's persistent / corroborated with other factors / any other aspect that suggests there's actual risk, it's not likely to progress other than what you've been told.
This. Unless it's repetitive, then it's probably been sent to the wrong person, so forget about it.

Dibble

13,286 posts

270 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
As above, malicious communications. To get traffic data (incoming/outgoing calls, texts etc) to the receipiemt's mobile phone, to then allow a subsequent subscriber check, would require an application under RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act).

A successful RIPA application (which has to be authorised by an officer of Superintendent rank or above) has to show that the request is necessary and proportionate and cover the risks of collateral intrusion. Whether a "one off" text would meet the necessity criteria would obviously depend a lot on the message content.

Once the sender's number has been identified, a subsequent RIPA has to be submitted to get the subscriber details (and potentially top up data) for the number. If it's a PAYG mobile, these often aren't registered and if there is top up data, I can tell you now that getting CCTV from the other end of the country (if it exists at the top up location) probably won't happen. I've dealt with a series of courier frauds recently, with top ups being done in London. My force won't authorise the trip for me to go to London and attempt to get CCTV (purely down to the cost) and asking the Met to do anything is utterly pointless. It's actually easier for me to type the email, print it and throw it in the bin myself...

You could try approaching the service provider to see if they can identify the number to the. Block it or hand it to the police. I'd be surpised if the service provider would give you details of the number, or do the checks without a RIPA application, but nothing ventured, nothing gained.

marshalla

15,902 posts

231 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
elanfan said:
The evidence will still be on the providers servers which can be accessed by the police with various permissions etc.
The billing data might be, the content of the message won't.

Without the sending number, there's nothing that can be done.

Funkycoldribena

7,379 posts

184 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
Correct me if I'm wrong but you got one dickie text from someone who probably got a wrong number which then got deleted and you went to the police?

berlintaxi

8,535 posts

203 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
Funkycoldribena said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but you got one dickie text from someone who probably got a wrong number which then got deleted and you went to the police?
None of us know what the text said,how would you feel if it was sent to your daughter threatening rape for example?

Funkycoldribena

7,379 posts

184 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
berlintaxi said:
None of us know what the text said,how would you feel if it was sent to your daughter threatening rape for example?
But there's nothing in the op saying it was for the recipient.Sounds like a stray,nasty text.

CoolHands

23,635 posts

225 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
Report it to Jeremy Kyle, in the meantime let the police get on with real jobs rolleyes

srebbe64

Original Poster:

13,021 posts

267 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
There's more to this than I'm prepared to put online so I realise I'm being somewhat cryptic. But trust me it's not a trivial matter - there is a history of something which goes back over several years. I think I'll continue to pursue it via the police and see what happens.

Baryonyx

18,292 posts

189 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
Sounds like you could do with a walk and some fresh air.

MattHall91

1,275 posts

154 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
While I can half understand, I think it's a bit unfair expecting useful advice when we don't know the background of it all or what the text said.

allergictocheese

1,290 posts

143 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
Malicious Communications Act requires prosecution to prove intent. Better to use s127 Communications Act 2003 where it's an objective test with no intent requirement.

Not that one random message from source unknown should necessarily lead to police involvement.

Ilovejapcrap

3,311 posts

142 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
How olds the minor ?

I only ask as is it some kind of tit for tat type thing by kids of a certain age?


pork911

7,365 posts

213 months

Wednesday 29th April 2015
quotequote all
srebbe64 said:
There's more to this than I'm prepared to put online so I realise I'm being somewhat cryptic. But trust me it's not a trivial matter - there is a history of something which goes back over several years. I think I'll continue to pursue it via the police and see what happens.
by all means pursue it then but i'm not sure what useful advice you hoped to get here with half a story and why on earth you hadn't just pressed the police over a non-trivial long running matter

also, the child should not be given back that phone (it was taken off them immediately wasn't it?) and they should be warned that any future similar messages on their new phone (if they are to have any) should be brought to the attention of their guardian immediately and not be deleted (???)

their phone use generally should be a matter for consideration