Is this a crime?

alleycat`

technically - 5 years or a pretty big fine.

However, as a tax payer i'd be annoyed if they prosecuted her over a domestic situation like this.

the police, cps and the judiciary are fairly random (as far as i can work out) about how they behave at the best of times.

euronorris

alleycat` wrote: »

[FONT=verdana, sans-serif]A[/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif] person is guilty of an offence under this section (section 3) if:[/FONT]

• [FONT=verdana, sans-serif]he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and [/FONT]
• [FONT=verdana, sans-serif]at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.[/FONT]

[FONT=verdana, sans-serif]The [/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]requisite intent[/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif] is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of the computer and by so doing impair its operation or hinder access to it, or any data stored on it. The [/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]requisite knowledge[/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif] is knowledge that any modification he intends to cause is unauthorised. [/FONT]

[FONT=verdana, sans-serif]Morally i might think what she did is fair enough but it is against the law.[/FONT]

But the emails are not stored on the computer. They are stored on Hotmail, out in cyber space somewhere.

I don't get why he's so bothered anyway. If I had acted that way, and my emails to other men were then deleted, I would think "oh well, he could've reacted a lot worse" and left it at that. Put it down to experience etc. Not that I would do what he did anyway.

Even if it is a crime and he does report it, I very much doubt that the police will do anything about it. They might show their face and give a warning, but honestly, it isn't worth their time to do anything else.

And here's why I think so: Friend physically assaulted by her brother. Police called (and it's not his first offence), they arrive, they issue warning and they leave.

Another friend's laptop is stolen. There is CCTV evidence showing the perps, their car and the licence plate number. They took the details, but no action was taken. They pretty much told her 'it's not worth our time'.

So, I have a really, really hard time believing that they will do ANYTHING about a few deleted emails.

*Louise*

alleycat` wrote: »

technically - 5 years or a pretty big fine.

However, as a tax payer i'd be annoyed if they prosecuted her over a domestic situation like this.

the police, cps and the judiciary are fairly random (as far as i can work out) about how they behave at the best of times.

I'd be more annoyed if she got 5 years when burglars, muggers etc can get away with less...

...but that's a whole other thread...:o

alleycat`

euronorris wrote: »

But the emails are not stored on the computer. They are stored on Hotmail, out in cyber space somewhere.

So, I have a really, really hard time believing that they will do ANYTHING about a few deleted emails.

Hotmail is not cyberspace somewhere, it is classed (under this definition) as a computer.

You are getting hung up on the symantics of a "PC".
Are you really suggesting that anything on an ISP or other mail providers platform is not covered by any legal statue because it isn't a computer as a home user would understand it?

Putting all that aside:-

I would 100% support you in saying she shouldn't be prosecuted for a domestic dispute as it isn't what i would class as the spirit of the law.

alleycat`

*Louise* wrote: »

I'd be more annoyed if she got 5 years when burglars, muggers etc can get away with less...

...but that's a whole other thread...:o

a very big thread

Pee

The heading of this is is this a crime. Answer is yes.

Is it a crime for her now ex to sleep around whilst in a relationship with her? No.

Whether it is morally wrong, in my opinion, yes, or whether morallity and legality should have some link are not the issues we are being asked about.

Angelic

Bitsy_Beans wrote: »

Honestly if it was a bloke who'd been cheated on and found out there'd still be the same level of support and probably people who would think it was funny.

I agree and find it silly and offensive that some men claim I would react in a different way to a male poster.
If you are in a serious relationship then you should stick to the rules and not be emailing others behind your love's back. Gender doesn't come into it , respect does and it's wrong treating a man or woman badly.
If your relationship sucks or is boring then talking about it and finding a solution is the answer , not finding people online and exchanging dirty messages and pictures.

Sharlee

Maybe a crime but I am sure that the police will not be in the least interested. It's very difficult to prove computer crime and if he divulged his password........

The police will talk about proportionality - the use of scarce resources for the detection of a crime. Also the two stage test for charging - is there evidence? Is it in the public interest?

Well obviously not.

I may have done this in the past but now I prefer the idea 'what goes around comes around'.

Tell your mate to stop worrying, it'll come to nowt.

tandraig

oh for gawds sake - so she guessed his password and accessed his email!
doubt if the police would be interested as
a - she didnt benefit by it - ie - she didnt access his bank details and moved monies to her account
b - no-one was deprived by it monetarily
and thats what the law is primarily about isnt it?
so what are they going to do? take her to court for it? doubt it! and if they do what jury are going to find her guilty?

tandraig

Fonz wrote: »

I'd say most certainly a crime under the computer misuse act. It carries a maximum sentence of 5 years...


modification of computer material
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—
(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and
(b) at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing—
(a) to impair the operation of any computer;
(b) to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or
(c) to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.
(3) The intent need not be directed at—
(a) any particular computer;
(b) any particular program or data or a program or data of any particular kind; or
(c) any particular modification or a modification of any particular kind.
(4) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite knowledge is knowledge that any modification he intends to cause is unauthorised.
(5) It is immaterial for the purposes of this section whether an unauthorised modification or any intended effect of it of a kind mentioned in subsection (2) above is, or is intended to be, permanent or merely temporary.

Well there you go - wasnt a he - was a she! as apparently the law only applies to males SHE cannot be prosecuted!!!
how long did it take you to make that bit of legislation up?