Malicious email / police involved
Discussion
We had a knock on the door yesterday from a police officer. I accompanied my son to the station, he is 20 and hasnt been in trouble with the police before.
Around a year ago a video had been circulating of a friends sister doing various things on a webcam site.
This video then got found by one of my sons friends and was passed about. My son was sent it and thought his friend (whose sister was in the video) deserved to know what was going on. He didnt want to get involved directly but felt this needed taking down so sent. In hindsight he should of just told him as this has now been reported for malicious communication.
The police were brilliant and once he explained that he had sent it to him to let him know and it wasnt malicious they released him. He phoned them today for an update and they said the receiver of the email (his friend) wants to press charges.
What would the likely outcome of this be?
Around a year ago a video had been circulating of a friends sister doing various things on a webcam site.
This video then got found by one of my sons friends and was passed about. My son was sent it and thought his friend (whose sister was in the video) deserved to know what was going on. He didnt want to get involved directly but felt this needed taking down so sent. In hindsight he should of just told him as this has now been reported for malicious communication.
The police were brilliant and once he explained that he had sent it to him to let him know and it wasnt malicious they released him. He phoned them today for an update and they said the receiver of the email (his friend) wants to press charges.
What would the likely outcome of this be?
This makes no sense.
OPs son received an email from a friend (friend A) attached to which was compromising video footage of the sister of another friend (friend B).
OPs son decides that friend B should be told which he does by forwarding the email and atachment to friend B. Presumably with some kind of "I thought you should know about his circulating" commentary.
Then someone (?) reports this to the police who visit OPs son. Presumably though just to validate the original source of the email that had been sent to him by friend A (despite that presumably being very clear from the email chain). But the OP hints that the son was being formally interviewed re his involvement ? And OP is saying that friend B wants charges passed against his son. Ehhhh ?
We have no idea if the age of the girl, whether the video was made consensually, how friend A got hold of it, whether friend A has been interviewed by plod, or whether a crime has even been committed !
And they say police resources are limited and that they can only now deal with serious crime.......
OPs son received an email from a friend (friend A) attached to which was compromising video footage of the sister of another friend (friend B).
OPs son decides that friend B should be told which he does by forwarding the email and atachment to friend B. Presumably with some kind of "I thought you should know about his circulating" commentary.
Then someone (?) reports this to the police who visit OPs son. Presumably though just to validate the original source of the email that had been sent to him by friend A (despite that presumably being very clear from the email chain). But the OP hints that the son was being formally interviewed re his involvement ? And OP is saying that friend B wants charges passed against his son. Ehhhh ?
We have no idea if the age of the girl, whether the video was made consensually, how friend A got hold of it, whether friend A has been interviewed by plod, or whether a crime has even been committed !
And they say police resources are limited and that they can only now deal with serious crime.......
Edited by OddCat on Saturday 21st October 22:18
OK just to fill in the blanks:
Girl is middle aged.
my Son sent the girls brother an anonymous email as he didnt want to get directly involved. Mates came across said video on famous adult site and sent it to him but warned him not to tell anyone
Brother then contacts police to say ive had this email
Police do IP check and knock on our door
Son admits to sending it and says he would do it again as brother should know whats been going around. Police agree its not malicious and believe what he has said.
Girl is middle aged.
my Son sent the girls brother an anonymous email as he didnt want to get directly involved. Mates came across said video on famous adult site and sent it to him but warned him not to tell anyone
Brother then contacts police to say ive had this email
Police do IP check and knock on our door
Son admits to sending it and says he would do it again as brother should know whats been going around. Police agree its not malicious and believe what he has said.
i'm not a lawyer but a video in the public domain, how can they prove malicious intent, unless your son did it to wind his mate up, which may be slander etc but the video would discount this. But is it really malicious to send such a video, i would be getting a lawyer who specilises in this as i think the police are fishing.
just had a look at the law, i think your son sending anonymous might go against him.
''Under section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1998 it is an offence to send an indecent, offensive or threatening letter, electronic communication or other article to another person and sections 85 Postal Services Act 2000 or s127 Communications Act 2003 there are similar specific offences relating to sending postal or telephone messages which are indecent offensive or threatening. Both offences are punishable with up to six months imprisonment and/or a fine. Because the Malicious Communications Offence is more wide ranging than the Telecommunications offence it is more likely to be charged by the Police than the Postal Services or Communications Act offences. ''
or the
''Communications Act 2003
Section 127(1) of the CA makes it an offence to make improper use of a public electronic communications network. Such improper use is stated as sending “a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character”.
Section 127(2) makes it an offence to send messages “for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another”.
As i said i would be getting a lawyer and taking this very seriously. I mean whatever you Son has told you sending an anonymous email of someone's sister doing sex stuff isn't really normal behavior, i mean most would just tell the friend not send the video, and not 'anonymously'.
''Under section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1998 it is an offence to send an indecent, offensive or threatening letter, electronic communication or other article to another person and sections 85 Postal Services Act 2000 or s127 Communications Act 2003 there are similar specific offences relating to sending postal or telephone messages which are indecent offensive or threatening. Both offences are punishable with up to six months imprisonment and/or a fine. Because the Malicious Communications Offence is more wide ranging than the Telecommunications offence it is more likely to be charged by the Police than the Postal Services or Communications Act offences. ''
or the
''Communications Act 2003
Section 127(1) of the CA makes it an offence to make improper use of a public electronic communications network. Such improper use is stated as sending “a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character”.
Section 127(2) makes it an offence to send messages “for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another”.
As i said i would be getting a lawyer and taking this very seriously. I mean whatever you Son has told you sending an anonymous email of someone's sister doing sex stuff isn't really normal behavior, i mean most would just tell the friend not send the video, and not 'anonymously'.
Edited by The Spruce goose on Saturday 21st October 23:40
OddCat said:
This makes no sense.
OPs son received an email from a friend (friend A) attached to which was compromising video footage of the sister of another friend (friend B).
OPs son decides that friend B should be told which he does by forwarding the email and atachment to friend B. Presumably with some kind of "I thought you should know about his circulating" commentary.
Then someone (?) reports this to the police who visit OPs son. Presumably though just to validate the original source of the email that had been sent to him by friend A (despite that presumably being very clear from the email chain). But the OP hints that the son was being formally interviewed re his involvement ? And OP is saying that friend B wants charges passed against his son. Ehhhh ?
We have no idea if the age of the girl, whether the video was made consensually, how friend A got hold of it, whether friend A has been interviewed by plod, or whether a crime has even been committed !
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?OPs son received an email from a friend (friend A) attached to which was compromising video footage of the sister of another friend (friend B).
OPs son decides that friend B should be told which he does by forwarding the email and atachment to friend B. Presumably with some kind of "I thought you should know about his circulating" commentary.
Then someone (?) reports this to the police who visit OPs son. Presumably though just to validate the original source of the email that had been sent to him by friend A (despite that presumably being very clear from the email chain). But the OP hints that the son was being formally interviewed re his involvement ? And OP is saying that friend B wants charges passed against his son. Ehhhh ?
We have no idea if the age of the girl, whether the video was made consensually, how friend A got hold of it, whether friend A has been interviewed by plod, or whether a crime has even been committed !
And they say police resources are limited and that they can only now deal with serious crime.......
Edited by OddCat on Saturday 21st October 22:18
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.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff