Device help, when can they return items?
Notifications OFF
Hello, i am in need of help involving my brother who has been arrested for a sexual communication on snapchat with a real child.
The visit from police came in July 2024 where they seized all devices in the house, over 10 things were taken including laptops, tablets and phones.
Its now been 18 months and his investigating police officer says all items are still awaiting to be checked.
So my question is can they return devices once they have extracted the data on the drive or do they have to be retained? What I mean is actually return the whole device as soon as they've imaged it but if anything illegal is found during the review process then it has to be re-seized. Because the initial arrest was not image related it was a sexual communication on snapchat. My brother swears on his fathers life there are no search terms, no dark web activity , no suspiicous searching or websites visited, nothing has been flagged by his ISP, no credit card activity or signing up making paymemts to suspicious websites or other people.
My brother fully understands the investigation and will co operate best he can but is really struggling without certain items as his laptop contained apps to support his medical and disability needs. He is totally deaf and needs subtitled software to make phone calls via bluetooth. He just doesnt know how hes going to cope waiting for another year while they review the device (if they ever get round to it)..Like i said the offence is not image related just a silly communication. I can understand if it was image related they would need to keep it.
So just wondering has any one else had devices back as soon as imaging is complete? Do you think they can return things if an arrest isn't image related....
We did however ask chat gpt for an opinion and it suggested speaking to the police in charge or the solicitor but then again dont really trust chat gpt in this situation and i think asking the police directly might raise them to be suspicious that said devices might contain images.
So before we take it up with any solicitor or officer we hope to get some opinions or info on here so really appreciate any reply, thanks.
The visit from police came in July 2024 where they seized all devices in the house, over 10 things were taken including laptops, tablets and phones.
Its now been 18 months and his investigating police officer says all items are still awaiting to be checked.
So my question is can they return devices once they have extracted the data on the drive or do they have to be retained? What I mean is actually return the whole device as soon as they've imaged it but if anything illegal is found during the review process then it has to be re-seized. Because the initial arrest was not image related it was a sexual communication on snapchat. My brother swears on his fathers life there are no search terms, no dark web activity , no suspiicous searching or websites visited, nothing has been flagged by his ISP, no credit card activity or signing up making paymemts to suspicious websites or other people.
My brother fully understands the investigation and will co operate best he can but is really struggling without certain items as his laptop contained apps to support his medical and disability needs. He is totally deaf and needs subtitled software to make phone calls via bluetooth. He just doesnt know how hes going to cope waiting for another year while they review the device (if they ever get round to it)..Like i said the offence is not image related just a silly communication. I can understand if it was image related they would need to keep it.
So just wondering has any one else had devices back as soon as imaging is complete? Do you think they can return things if an arrest isn't image related....
We did however ask chat gpt for an opinion and it suggested speaking to the police in charge or the solicitor but then again dont really trust chat gpt in this situation and i think asking the police directly might raise them to be suspicious that said devices might contain images.
So before we take it up with any solicitor or officer we hope to get some opinions or info on here so really appreciate any reply, thanks.
Hi, my person was arrested for sexual communication with a young person on snapchat. He admitted straight way to the allegation and informed the police that the only device he'd used was his phone. He also told the police that they'd find no illegal activity on any of his devices. They seized his work phone which they checked and returned the same evening, his laptop that was returned about about a month later and his phone which was returned a few months after his arrest. None of them contained any evidence. My understanding is that a device that contains no evidence will be returned once checked.
Hi
We were categorically told that seized devices would not be returned until sentencing had taken place - we got them back about 2 months post sentencing.
The only thing we got back early was his work laptop as it had to go back to his employer.
I guess different areas have different systems. We are South East England x
We were categorically told that seized devices would not be returned until sentencing had taken place - we got them back about 2 months post sentencing.
The only thing we got back early was his work laptop as it had to go back to his employer.
I guess different areas have different systems. We are South East England x
I'm not an expert but I would think that the police would have some responsibility to consider a disability but I am equally as sure that they won't bother unless challenged. They should mitigate the harm as long as there is no alternative you could set up. I know buying new devices is expensive but I'm not sure the police would care about that. You probably need legal help with this as a letter drafted by a solicitor would be your best bet to get some resolution. Thinking off the top of my head, the police could expedite checking of the device, they could provide a temporary substitute or clone. Deprivation of accessible communication for months is disproportionate when alternatives exist, but saying this via a solicitor would carry more weight and be less likely to be ignored by the police which is what many of us find happens regularly.
Thanks for the replies much appreciated. It is a communication allegation on snapchat. I'd have thought it would be the phone that should be of interest not a laptop or a back up hard drive. They are not going to find evidence of a snapchat communication on a 1960s radio either or bluetooth headphones, or a broken playstation 1 from 1996! . They just seized everything they could that was electrical. I feel they are just fishing for things to make him a criminal out of, even if they don't find the said chats they will contunue looking for images despite no suspicions or reports raised. He knows they wont find any. It's the chats they should be looking for , if they dont find the chats then it should stop right there, right now.
Devices weren't returned till my person was in jail and that was only when I had to chase it up They took items that belonged to other family members
Devices on which images were found were destroyed
Devices on which images were found were destroyed
Hi there, similar story for our situation but much earlier in the process. Was just wondering where you're based (region is fine if you're concerned)? Would just like to see if we're in a similar place to know real world examples. Thanks
Ocean... did your person receive NFA if nothing was found?
Hi Floatingthrough, although there was no evidence found on my son’s devices, he was guilty of sexual communication and admitted this at the time of his arrest. He was later charged with three offences relating to sexual communication, pleaded guilty in court, and received a two-year suspended sentence, along with ten years on the Sex Offenders Register and a ten-year SHPO. Most of the evidence came from my son’s own admissions, supported by a small amount of evidence from the underage person he communicated with.
Scared123, we are in Cheshire. The police were awfully heavy handed they took almost everything they could that was electrical. All over a single allegation.
He didnt provide passwords to any device as the solicitor advised him not to. Now wondering if this could be reason for the delay as now can't help thinking if he had given passwords they could've been triaged and returned by now, unless the Cheshire region is not supported by the triage system.
if there is no chance of him having them back until examination or conviction then surely the solicitor should've advised him to give passwords and not withold them as witholding passwords would be doing nothing but prolonging our misery and adding to the misery of others - suspects, victims and all their families who have to wait for backlogs to catch up.... Unless solictor thought NFA could be likely before any examination takes place.
Questions, questions, questions!
He didnt provide passwords to any device as the solicitor advised him not to. Now wondering if this could be reason for the delay as now can't help thinking if he had given passwords they could've been triaged and returned by now, unless the Cheshire region is not supported by the triage system.
if there is no chance of him having them back until examination or conviction then surely the solicitor should've advised him to give passwords and not withold them as witholding passwords would be doing nothing but prolonging our misery and adding to the misery of others - suspects, victims and all their families who have to wait for backlogs to catch up.... Unless solictor thought NFA could be likely before any examination takes place.
Questions, questions, questions!
Ocean thank you, was your son aware the person was underage? If you don't mind me asking x
Thanks for the reply. Just curious was your person moved to RUI at any point (if they were on bail) or did they remain on bail the entire time with restrictions?
It has been bail for the whole time. Not sure if will be RUI as it is a real child involved, unless there are others here that have gone from bail to RUI in similar cases.
In the bail conditions there are no online restrictions either or messenging app monitoring which i find odd considering its an online offence involving a real child.
In the bail conditions there are no online restrictions either or messenging app monitoring which i find odd considering its an online offence involving a real child.
Ah right okay. Similar situation for our story, no online restrictions either for an online communication but was hoping you'd say you had been moved to RUI tbh. Going to put a full post out to see if other peoples had been. Thanks for your replies.
Hi Floatingthrough, Initially, he did not know the person’s age. He had been communicating with her via Snapchat on and off for around a week when something she said caused him to question how old she was. At that point, he deleted his account.
Sadly, a few days later, he returned to Snapchat and, despite now being aware of her age, communicated with the person once more in a sexual manner. After this, he deleted the account permanently and had no further contact.
Seven months later, he was arrested in connection with these events.
Thanks Ocean, it blows my mind the time it takes between the offence taking place and the arrest.
Did the police say what the outcome would have been had he not returned to the chat and it remained a conversation not knowing the age?
Did the police say what the outcome would have been had he not returned to the chat and it remained a conversation not knowing the age?
Hi Floatingthrough,
I don’t know whether the police ever had that conversation with my son. He did not know the victim’s true age until he received the charges. Although she admitted she was underage, she told him she was older than she actually was.
The judge reviewed the evidence in my son’s case very thoroughly and stated during sentencing that he understood my son was unaware of how young the victim was. However, he also made clear—correctly—that this could not be used as mitigation. My son was guilty of abuse because he knew the victim was underage, even though he did not know her exact age.
I gave MY devices voluntary ,and my son has been convicted ,been to prison ,and released. I never got my devices back even though I asked for the first year ...its now been nearly 3 years !!
How is this ok? Did you report them stolen?
My sons were real children and he's gone from bail to rui
Ah right thanks for reply Jam Doughtnut. At what point was that? 9 months in?