Malicious email / police involved
Discussion
Red Devil said:
Could I escape a charge under 127(1)(a) simply by arguing that I didn't think the message was grossly offensive and that I had no intention of causing distress to the recipient?
What am I missing here?
You are missing that Lord Brown agrees with Lords Bingham and Carswell. So do the others. Brown agrees but then goes on a slight frolic of his own, but it matters not as that isn't the decision.What am I missing here?
You would be acquitted on the basis that you describe, unless the Court took the view that the communication was so obviously offensive that intent to offend is to be inferred.
Breadvan72 said:
Red Devil said:
Could I escape a charge under 127(1)(a) simply by arguing that I didn't think the message was grossly offensive and that I had no intention of causing distress to the recipient?
What am I missing here?
You are missing that Lord Brown agrees with Lords Bingham and Carswell. So do the others. Brown agrees but then goes on a slight frolic of his own, but it matters not as that isn't the decision.What am I missing here?
Breadvan72 said:
You would be acquitted on the basis that you describe, unless the Court took the view that the communication was so obviously offensive that intent to offend is to be inferred.
Thanks. Always a pleasure to have the benefit of your advice. 
It's pretty clear that the HoL judges overruled the lower courts specifically because they felt that the remarks were grossly offensive.
The concession by the respondent's counsel in the Divisional Court can't have helped either.
Lord Carswell said:
Paragraph 21.
What matters is whether reasonable persons in our society would find it grossly offensive.
Paragraph 22.
First, it appears that the justices may have placed some weight on the reaction of the actual listeners to the messages, rather than considering the reactions of reasonable members of society in general. Secondly, it was conceded by the respondent's counsel in the Divisional Court that a member of a relevant ethnic minority who heard the messages would have found them grossly offensive. If one accepts the correctness of that concession, as I believe one should, then one cannot easily escape the conclusion that the messages would be regarded as grossly offensive by reasonable persons in general, judged by the standards of an open and just multiracial society. The terms used were opprobrious and insulting, and not accidentally so. I am satisfied that reasonable citizens, not only members of the ethnic minorities referred to by the terms, would find them grossly offensive.
I don't do racial slurs, nor subscribe to Faceache or similar social media, and certainly don't frequent webcam sites. Therefore the likelihood of my appearing before any Justices on such a matter is exceedingly remote!
I also think that the OP and/or his son is being economical with the truth.
If my sister found herself in porn I'd a) be surprised but b) also not really want to know. A friend messaging me "Hi SB, mate you need to have a word with your sis, I found this video: example.org/videoidontwanttosee, don't watch it as it's your sister but seriously talk to her. ATB, Jim" is going to be received as well as it can. A screenshot of my sister in the middle of a sex act, accompanied with "lol SB your sister is such a slag when is it my turn lol" is probably going to be received as it has been.
If my sister found herself in porn I'd a) be surprised but b) also not really want to know. A friend messaging me "Hi SB, mate you need to have a word with your sis, I found this video: example.org/videoidontwanttosee, don't watch it as it's your sister but seriously talk to her. ATB, Jim" is going to be received as well as it can. A screenshot of my sister in the middle of a sex act, accompanied with "lol SB your sister is such a slag when is it my turn lol" is probably going to be received as it has been.
stuartmmcfc said:
I can think of much worse. What if it was your Mum in it for starters?
Wait, do you mean BV's mum, or 'your mum' as in kids watching a video of their grandmother? Or do you mean 'their mum', watching a video of their mother?All of the above don't sound like a particularly good thing to be watching, out of respect for BV in the first instance or not wanting to have to attend counselling for the rest of their lives in the latter two.
Don't understand this at all
Could understand police involvement if it was a revenge porn issue, or an under age person, but no suggestion of either.
If a grown woman wants to share pornographic videos of her self on the internet and they find thier way back to her brother and he gets offended, who gives a s
t?
Don't the police have better things to do?
Could understand police involvement if it was a revenge porn issue, or an under age person, but no suggestion of either.
If a grown woman wants to share pornographic videos of her self on the internet and they find thier way back to her brother and he gets offended, who gives a s
t?Don't the police have better things to do?
ging84 said:
Don't understand this at all
Could understand police involvement if it was a revenge porn issue, or an under age person, but no suggestion of either.
If a grown woman wants to share pornographic videos of her self on the internet and they find thier way back to her brother and he gets offended, who gives a st?
Don't the police have better things to do?
And finally, ladies and gentleman, we have a winner !Could understand police involvement if it was a revenge porn issue, or an under age person, but no suggestion of either.
If a grown woman wants to share pornographic videos of her self on the internet and they find thier way back to her brother and he gets offended, who gives a s
t?Don't the police have better things to do?
Beautifully put ging84. Nail absolutely hit on the head !!
OddCat said:
ging84 said:
Don't understand this at all
Could understand police involvement if it was a revenge porn issue, or an under age person, but no suggestion of either.
If a grown woman wants to share pornographic videos of her self on the internet and they find thier way back to her brother and he gets offended, who gives a st?
Don't the police have better things to do?
And finally, ladies and gentleman, we have a winner !Could understand police involvement if it was a revenge porn issue, or an under age person, but no suggestion of either.
If a grown woman wants to share pornographic videos of her self on the internet and they find thier way back to her brother and he gets offended, who gives a s
t?Don't the police have better things to do?
Beautifully put ging84. Nail absolutely hit on the head !!
Can kind of see this from the victims view.
I appreciate my sister may well love gobbling on cock in her spare time and she may well put vids of this online, maybe as a second income. It is most certainly something I don't want to see though.
As has been said there is a world of difference between someone sending an anonymous email saying "Hi mate just letting you know some lads have found some porn of your sis so maybe expect some ribbing in the near future" and " Hey check out what your sis is up to" and its an embedded (I don't have to click any links or attachments to view it) pic of my sis slobbering on a cock.
The latter very much comes with an intent to upset or mock the recipient rather than being helpful.
I appreciate my sister may well love gobbling on cock in her spare time and she may well put vids of this online, maybe as a second income. It is most certainly something I don't want to see though.
As has been said there is a world of difference between someone sending an anonymous email saying "Hi mate just letting you know some lads have found some porn of your sis so maybe expect some ribbing in the near future" and " Hey check out what your sis is up to" and its an embedded (I don't have to click any links or attachments to view it) pic of my sis slobbering on a cock.
The latter very much comes with an intent to upset or mock the recipient rather than being helpful.
RB Will said:
Can kind of see this from the victims view.
I appreciate my sister may well love gobbling on cock in her spare time and she may well put vids of this online, maybe as a second income. It is most certainly something I don't want to see though.
As has been said there is a world of difference between someone sending an anonymous email saying "Hi mate just letting you know some lads have found some porn of your sis so maybe expect some ribbing in the near future" and " Hey check out what your sis is up to" and its an embedded (I don't have to click any links or attachments to view it) pic of my sis slobbering on a cock.
The latter very much comes with an intent to upset or mock the recipient rather than being helpful.
Ahhh, Yes. It's the old "my feelings have been a bit hurt" crime. I appreciate my sister may well love gobbling on cock in her spare time and she may well put vids of this online, maybe as a second income. It is most certainly something I don't want to see though.
As has been said there is a world of difference between someone sending an anonymous email saying "Hi mate just letting you know some lads have found some porn of your sis so maybe expect some ribbing in the near future" and " Hey check out what your sis is up to" and its an embedded (I don't have to click any links or attachments to view it) pic of my sis slobbering on a cock.
The latter very much comes with an intent to upset or mock the recipient rather than being helpful.
Thank god we have so many police that deploying a few to look at these things doesn't make any difference.
But imagine if there were real crimes happening and they were being ignored so that plod could deal with daftness like this. That would be mental.....
OddCat said:
RB Will said:
Can kind of see this from the victims view.
I appreciate my sister may well love gobbling on cock in her spare time and she may well put vids of this online, maybe as a second income. It is most certainly something I don't want to see though.
As has been said there is a world of difference between someone sending an anonymous email saying "Hi mate just letting you know some lads have found some porn of your sis so maybe expect some ribbing in the near future" and " Hey check out what your sis is up to" and its an embedded (I don't have to click any links or attachments to view it) pic of my sis slobbering on a cock.
The latter very much comes with an intent to upset or mock the recipient rather than being helpful.
Ahhh, Yes. It's the old "my feelings have been a bit hurt" crime. I appreciate my sister may well love gobbling on cock in her spare time and she may well put vids of this online, maybe as a second income. It is most certainly something I don't want to see though.
As has been said there is a world of difference between someone sending an anonymous email saying "Hi mate just letting you know some lads have found some porn of your sis so maybe expect some ribbing in the near future" and " Hey check out what your sis is up to" and its an embedded (I don't have to click any links or attachments to view it) pic of my sis slobbering on a cock.
The latter very much comes with an intent to upset or mock the recipient rather than being helpful.
Thank god we have so many police that deploying a few to look at these things doesn't make any difference.
But imagine if there were real crimes happening and they were being ignored so that plod could deal with daftness like this. That would be mental.....
d. Plods got to do their nails and wear high heels these days. It's not Dixon Of Dock Green anymore. More like The Rocky Horror Show....we are back to the issue of whether the material was 'offensive' (as in illegal) or whether the recipient was 'offended' (as in he personally found it distasteful). These are two completely different things.
The first is a crime. The second is entirely dependent upon someone's level of sensitivity. Assuming no racist / religionist / whateverist aspect I'm not sure that offending someone who is easily offended (accidentally or otherwise and maybe easily done) would be worthy of significant attention ?
The first is a crime. The second is entirely dependent upon someone's level of sensitivity. Assuming no racist / religionist / whateverist aspect I'm not sure that offending someone who is easily offended (accidentally or otherwise and maybe easily done) would be worthy of significant attention ?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff