Revenge !!!!!! - have you experienced it or have your children?

Tropez

Gloomendoom wrote: »

From reading that, it looks like there is no need for new laws. All the bases seem to be covered already. All that is needed is a few deserving people to be made an example of.

Well the problem is that there is a grey area. Releasing images to specific individuals to spite an ex is legislated against, but releasing images to random websites where specific individuals may or may not see them is more blurry from a legal perspective. Furthermore, there's the question over civil vs criminal acts. If you start lumping stuff up on Twitter, you're not directly targeting the victim (although you may use secondary means such as some unsubtle hints to do so). The new laws will cover this eventuality.

There's also no legislation that requires websites to remove such photographs. Even the EU "right to be forgotten" laws are only targeted at specific large websites (such as Google) and other websites/search engines may choose to comply. But the type of websites specifically set up for this generally wouldn't comply with such requests anyway, so part of the law would likely target them as well.

Of course, that said, it would still require the victim to be made aware that these images have been released. In some cases, victims have only become aware months after the fact when tipped off by another person but at least there will be specific punishments.

Currently, out of over one hundred police investigations, the law has only stretched as far as to allow for the prosecution of a handful of offenders.

BJV

Tropez wrote: »

Currently, out of over one hundred police investigations, the law has only stretched as far as to allow for the prosecution of a handful of offenders.

Look perhaps you and I have got off on the wrong foot. As no matter what I say you think that it is a way of me trying to shift blame to the victim. Which it is not. I am not advocating that it is right and fair and yes 100% people should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, no matter what the crime.


The diamond ring and the how long do you have access to an image was a genuine question.


I really did discuss this with my OH and we could not decide? It was not a attempt to do anything other than ask for opinions. Surely that is what a discussion is. We listen to other point's of view digest them and then respond. A good discussion also means that you have to consider other points of view. They may not be yours but they are still valid. In fact a good healthy debate or discussion often leads to more questions.


I do not have all the answers and would hate to be in a position where I did. ( or thought I did)


Cyber crime of all description is growing and will continue to grow possibly in many formats we have not even considered yet.


It is wrong and the people behind it have to be brought to justice. But you still can limit the opportunity. Just as you already do by way of as you said limiting what the mass see on your face book page.


P.s Ref your car insurance - friendly advice so please do not take as anything other than that I would check with your insurance company as if you did leave your keys in the ignition door open and go for a walk your insurance company would not cover you as they would class it as negligent behaviour.

Tropez

BJV wrote: »

I am not advocating that it is right and fair and yes 100% people should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, no matter what the crime.

Thank you for clarifying that.

The diamond ring and the how long do you have access to an image was a genuine question.

They're not the same thing though. If you give someone a gift of a diamond ring there's very little they can do with that ring in the event of a split that would cause you public humiliation. Sure, maybe if it was some sort of family heirloom, and they posted a video on Youtube of them taking a blowtorch to it then possibly that might cause some distress but the reality is there isn't really much they could do with it further than that.

A nude photograph on the other hand is a different matter. It's not a question of whether they have access to it or not - you have to accept that they had access to it, just that you have to accept that you have (in most probability given you're sending them nudie pics) slept with them. They've had full access to your body anyway (cases of youngsters being numpties on Snapchat and the like notwithstanding). But if they choose to post that somewhere else, that can cause a real problem - emotionally/psychologically, and even in personal and professional life. That's the issue here - not that the person has the picture but what that person chooses to do with the picture.

I really did discuss this with my OH and we could not decide? It was not a attempt to do anything other than ask for opinions. Surely that is what a discussion is. We listen to other point's of view digest them and then respond. A good discussion also means that you have to consider other points of view. They may not be yours but they are still valid. In fact a good healthy debate or discussion often leads to more questions.

Unfortunately, we're not debating whether we should move back to the gold standard, or whether a full on onslaught against ISIS is the correct course of action. We're "discussing" something that has moral and ethical implications and those are deeply personal. You have every right to your opinion on the subject but you're not going to change my own personal moral code of conduct. Just as I don't actually expect to change anyone elses. To be honest, the only reason I'm engaging in this is to kill time while I wait for the parts of a new computer to be delivered (hooray for Yodel and their inability to deliver things when they say they will).

It is wrong and the people behind it have to be brought to justice. But you still can limit the opportunity. Just as you already do by way of as you said limiting what the mass see on your face book page.

But again, that's where I take issue with it. You can limit the opportunity for most crimes by never leaving the house and deploying sentry turrets and militarised drones (although you'll probably end up with special ops eventually storming your house). But nobody really wants to live like that, except perhaps the most hardened misanthrope.

Friend of mine obviously limits what he has on Facebook. Doesn't mean I don't have a picture that would probably get him fired - he's not doing anything illegal, he's just being a knob. Would I publish that though? No because that's a knobbish thing to do.

Everyone's got skeletons, even if they're not of the nude picture variety. It wouldn't be right for those we've trusted to breach that trust and announce our skeletons to the world (unless they were seriously depraved or something, of course). We put our trust in a lot of faceless organisations every day who have information about what we're doing. Everyone leaves a digital paper trail... "surveillance society" and all that. Imagine the amount of information people wouldn't want leaked into the public arena.

Every time you say "you can limit the opportunity" you blame the victim. Sorry, but that's how I see it.

P.s Ref your car insurance - friendly advice so please do not take as anything other than that I would check with your insurance company as if you did leave your keys in the ignition door open and go for a walk your insurance company would not cover you as they would class it as negligent behaviour.

Best take a look at the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act. They can reduce the amount they cover you for in such circumstances but they cannot withdraw it entirely - unless they can prove you were trying to get your car nicked, in which case you'd be charged with (attempted) insurance fraud. The court would decide how much you'd be due.

Anyway, my car has keyless go and requires the device on my person to start it. A professional and skilled thief would be able to nick it but someone with those skills would nick it no matter what precautions I had or had not taken.

heuchera

I would try not to get involved with someone who would be so immature as to post naked pictures of me on the net. It sounds like something teenage boys would do, not a grown man.

However I do agree that things like revenge !!!!!! need to be policed better. But policing the internet is notoriously difficult, as anyone can make up a name and address and/or hide their ISP, and new accounts can be created in minutes.

onomatopoeia99

BJV wrote: »

It is wrong and the people behind it have to be brought to justice. But you still can limit the opportunity. Just as you already do by way of as you said limiting what the mass see on your face book page.


P.s Ref your car insurance - friendly advice so please do not take as anything other than that I would check with your insurance company as if you did leave your keys in the ignition door open and go for a walk your insurance company would not cover you as they would class it as negligent behaviour.

Even if something is easy to do it doesn't stop it being a crime.

If I leave my car unlocked with the keys in the ignition, someone getting in and driving off is still taking without consent (if that's the current version of the offence). The fact that it was easy for them to do does not stop it being a crime and simply wrong.

What insurers will pay out on is not relevant to whether or not an act is right or wrong. Insurers can victim blame for not mitigating their loss / taking reasonable steps to prevent the theft as their contract of insurance may require, the criminal law however should not.

Gloomendoom

heuchera wrote: »

I would try not to get involved with someone who would be so immature as to post naked pictures of me on the net. It sounds like something teenage boys would do, not a grown man.

I'm a grown man. Here's a link to a picture of my wife naked on the net...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/63391230#Comment_63391230

TopQuark

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

Of course its the persons fault who sends the photo, they might as well just put the photo on line themselves. I honestly do not know anyone whos that daft that they dont think that would happen.
Its not a sensible thing to do its just stupid.

Ergo, if you go out one night in revealing clothing, get drunk and get raped, of course it is entirely your own fault. You might as well have just offered yourself for the taking. Ridiculous.

It's a hypothetical scenario but anyone breaching my trust and sharing nude pics of me online as an act of revenge, would very quickly find themselves under arrest on suspicion of a serious crime. Because two can play at being c***$.

j.e.j.

Gloomendoom wrote: »

I'm a grown man. Here's a link to a picture of my wife naked on the net...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/63391230#Comment_63391230

:rotfl:
Er.. I don't think that qualifies as revenge !!!!!!, especially given that you've written: I think the subject is acceptably indistinct. Mods please remove if deemed inappropriate.

Presumably she doesn't mind you posting the photo on here, either??

TopQuark wrote: »

Ergo, if you go out one night in revealing clothing, get drunk and get raped, of course it is entirely your own fault. You might as well have just offered yourself for the taking.

Uh-oh Here we go...

j.e.j.

TopQuark wrote: »

It's a hypothetical scenario but anyone breaching my trust and sharing nude pics of me online as an act of revenge, would very quickly find themselves under arrest on suspicion of rape. Because two can play at being c***$.

You added this bit afterwards, and it makes even less sense than the first paragraph..

TopQuark

My point was that if someone attempted to ruin my life in such a way, I'd ruin theirs in return.