Malicious Communications
Discussion
I work in IT and one of the users has come to me today to say that they have received an email on their work email saying their wife is a 'slag'. He said she has possible form for messing about but wants to report this as malicious communications and the company to involve police?
I think this is mildly over the top its hardly a bomb threat, Ive told him to just block the email address and then come back to me if he gets anything else.
I think this is mildly over the top its hardly a bomb threat, Ive told him to just block the email address and then come back to me if he gets anything else.
dave7108 said:
I work in IT and one of the users has come to me today to say that they have received an email on their work email saying their wife is a 'slag'. He said she has possible form for messing about but wants to report this as malicious communications and the company to involve police?
I think this is mildly over the top its hardly a bomb threat, Ive told him to just block the email address and then come back to me if he gets anything else.
Inform HR and keep copies of the 'evidence'.I think this is mildly over the top its hardly a bomb threat, Ive told him to just block the email address and then come back to me if he gets anything else.
Was the e-mail from an internal person, if so inform HR and let them handle it. If they require any further assistance, do the IT bit and carry out e-mail searches as required and provide for them to root through.
If it's an external address, if it's a personal e-mail (Gmail, Hotmail etc.) probably not much can be done about it. If it's from another company, then again I'd suggest HR take a look and let them handle it.
As someone who works in IT, I'd not be troubling myself with it beyond providing any evidence as it's needed.
If it's an external address, if it's a personal e-mail (Gmail, Hotmail etc.) probably not much can be done about it. If it's from another company, then again I'd suggest HR take a look and let them handle it.
As someone who works in IT, I'd not be troubling myself with it beyond providing any evidence as it's needed.
It's not for the company to involve the police as they are not the victim. Should the employee wish to involve police that's for them to invoke and the company would be minded to assist in keeping evidence and ensuring the employee is safeguarded.
It probably should be noted though that the old offence of malicious communications which criminalised the sending of information known or believed to be false with the intent to cause distress or anxiety was repealed under the Online Safety Act 2023. It must now include the causing of non-trivial phycological or physical harm which is a significantly higher threshold.
Without more context it's unlikely to be an offence at all unless there's more in the email or there are repeated emails.
It probably should be noted though that the old offence of malicious communications which criminalised the sending of information known or believed to be false with the intent to cause distress or anxiety was repealed under the Online Safety Act 2023. It must now include the causing of non-trivial phycological or physical harm which is a significantly higher threshold.
Without more context it's unlikely to be an offence at all unless there's more in the email or there are repeated emails.
And we all wonder why everything is so expensive and why we have a cost of living crisis, when companies (and the police) have to budget for sorting out crap like this.
OP, just tell him to p
s off, you don't care what emails he receives and you've got better IT things to do.
Although in this ludicrously woke society we now inhabit, you're probably not allowed to do that - hence my first paragraph!
OP, just tell him to p
s off, you don't care what emails he receives and you've got better IT things to do. Although in this ludicrously woke society we now inhabit, you're probably not allowed to do that - hence my first paragraph!
Maybe the complainants wife is the other sort of 'slag'?
You know the sort... Likes a MK2 Jag, wears a sheepskin coat, bit fond of the chunky gold jewellery, has plenty of bottle, well known face on the manor and is known for being a bit tasty with a sawn off shooter...
Serious answer, keep all the evidence and let HR sort it out (with or without a sawn off)
You know the sort... Likes a MK2 Jag, wears a sheepskin coat, bit fond of the chunky gold jewellery, has plenty of bottle, well known face on the manor and is known for being a bit tasty with a sawn off shooter...
Serious answer, keep all the evidence and let HR sort it out (with or without a sawn off)
albrighton said:
... It probably should be noted though that the old offence of malicious communications which criminalised the sending of information known or believed to be false with the intent to cause distress or anxiety was repealed under the Online Safety Act 2023. It must now include the causing of non-trivial phycological or physical harm which is a significantly higher threshold.
...
Cool, I never knew that - I've got some emails to send ...
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff