How would this go down in the UK?

iKettles said:
What if he tried to blag that he had forgotten his password?
Click to expand...

That's right judge, I looked for a solution online, downloaded and installed the software, encrypted a laptop HDD a partition on my main PC's HDD and an external HDD then totally forgot the password :p
 
platinum87 said:
Firstly theres no need to encrypt the files when putting it on someones PC

What is stopping you is the lack of motivation to do such a thing, most people will just have a fight if they hate someone, very few will actually think to do such a thing, and even less will actually plan it and go through with it
Click to expand...

There is a need as i would have to download the illegal files onto my pc. How would i know which aren't fake sites to catch paedophiles? If i just encypt a random file It would literally take less then 5 minutes of my time to get somebody put in prison.

With other crimes you have allaby's to get you off the hook or dna evidence etc with this you have none of these things.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
He'd be prosecuted under Section 49 of Part III of RIPA.
Click to expand...

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000023_en_8

A seriously nasty piece of legislation in my (very amateur) opinion. As someone familiar with Computing but not legally minded I find it amazing something like this or the new Digital Economy bill can ever become law.

A few 'interesting' provisions that haven't been mentioned yet:

A disclosure requirement in respect of any protected information is necessary on grounds falling within this subsection if it is necessary—

(a) in the interests of national security;

(b) for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime; or

(c) in the interests of the economic well-being of the United Kingdom.
Click to expand...
Easy to make just about anything fall into the first two, the last is just plain odd (and troubling).

This section applies where a section 49 notice contains a provision requiring—

(a) the person to whom the notice is given, and

(b) every other person who becomes aware of it or of its contents,

to keep secret the giving of the notice, its contents and the things done in pursuance of it.
Click to expand...
(There are a few very woolly conditions for this one to be included though).

As the article points out, if you really were guilty of something serious there is no compelling reason to comply. "Take the 5th", refuse to answer and accept your 2/5 years. Better than revealing your CP stash/Terror Plans.
 
I don't believe the writter. first he said he didn't knowingly download the items, then he said he had 30 + images and deleted *some of them* then he says he won't give the passwords.

in all fairness, the usual case is tell a little truth with a lot of lies. if he knew he had other child porn - why not delete if he knew it was incriminating. and ontop not giving his password just leads me to believe he has more than what he's letting off. The FBI don't exactly raid random peoples houses in america just for fun.
 
It may simply be a case of 'He found a ton of porn and downloaded it, then realised some of it was clearly underaged, but others he wasn't sure of'. I mean, its not like you can ID girls from their pictures and find out how old they where when the pics were taken.

Its probably a case of 'better safe than sorry'.
 
Can someone clear something up for me. If a person were browsing 4chan /b/ and came across images that were of an illegal nature, would that incriminate them even if they had zero intention of seeing those images and zero interest in the images? And to what extent does the government/ISPs track everyone's download pipeline?
4chan can be funny... but you also see some things which don't need to be seen :(
 
If you inadvertently dl'd CP from 4chan yes it would bite you in the ass if they searched your pc.


but you'd have to be doing something pretty severe for them to find you/search your pc. (ie full on investigation of cp sharing groups you're a member off) not simply browsing 4 chan
 
Burnsy2023 said:
He'd be prosecuted under Section 49 of Part III of RIPA. He could then be jailed for up to 5 years in the case of terrorism or national security or 2 years for everything else.
Click to expand...

Under EU human rights law we still have a right to not self-incriminate, as such I'm not sure how failure to disclose passwords sits with that
 
FoxEye said:
I had to laugh the other day, when I found out that Hentai (drawn, 100% not linked to real CP), now carries the same prison terms as real-life photographed CP.

I mean, if that isn't the stupidest law ever, I don't know what is :D
Click to expand...

errr it does? wtf :(
 
Zom said:
Innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...

Not under UK law. That inconvenient concept no longer always applies. It was pointed out when RIPA was going through Parliament that it involved presumption of guilt and made it impossible for a defendent to prove their innocence, but that didn't matter because it wasn't written that way by accident.
 
rypt said:
Under EU human rights law we still have a right to not self-incriminate, as such I'm not sure how failure to disclose passwords sits with that
Click to expand...

Interesting point, if it was me I might try taking that to court. I'll make a note of that in my list of 'good pieces of EU law' too...

It also in general raises the question of corruption, how easy is it for the police to claim they found this here USB key during a search of your home and you're claiming no knowledge of the encryption key - that'll be 2 years in prison...sure that applies to other things too but this is much easier than most...
 
iviv said:
It may simply be a case of 'He found a ton of porn and downloaded it, then realised some of it was clearly underaged, but others he wasn't sure of'. I mean, its not like you can ID girls from their pictures and find out how old they where when the pics were taken.

Its probably a case of 'better safe than sorry'.
Click to expand...

In the UK, the age of the people in the pictures/video doesn't necessarily matter. It doesn't even matter whether or not they are people (a picture drawn from imagination counts), so why would the age of a person be considered important?
 
bigredshark said:
Interesting point, if it was me I might try taking that to court. I'll make a note of that in my list of 'good pieces of EU law' too...
Click to expand...

I know that EU has held before that self-incrimination does not apply to S172 with regard to motoring offences as it was seen as an investigative tool to aid the identification of the real culprit, however in this case you are not aiding them identifying anyone, you are aiding them in building a case against you.
 
Tefal said:
If you inadvertently dl'd CP from 4chan yes it would bite you in the ass if they searched your pc.
Click to expand...

It's worth bearing in mind that merely visiting the page is enough to make you guilty of possession and making of CP on the basis that a copy at least temporarily exists on your computer. Even if you have disabled browser caching completely, it still technically counts because a copy would have been made in the memory of your PC.
 
Imagine if police searched your house for some random reason like the neighbour said you were pedo and you genuinely couldn't remember/lost your key! you'd be screwed!
 
Angilion said:
It's worth bearing in mind that merely visiting the page is enough to make you guilty of possession and making of CP on the basis that a copy at least temporarily exists on your computer. Even if you have disabled browser caching completely, it still technically counts because a copy would have been made in the memory of your PC.
Click to expand...

Although it sometimes seems it, the law isn't inflexible. It's usually fairly obvious if someone's come across illegal material by accident and who's deliberately gone looking for it. At worst there'd be a caution.

(kind of quoted the wrong person here...referring to the 'accidentally saw it on 4chan' discussion)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom