What happens after?
Notifications OFF
What might happen if someone requests explicit images from a 16 year old and they publicly share screenshots of that request?
Do you mean what happens to the 16 year old? A 16 year old is a child, so the police would arrest the person who requested the images. They would probably also interview the 16 year old and seize their devices too, in order to find out what other conversations had taken place.
edel2020
What else could happen?
What else could happen?
A lot depends on what was said in the conversations. The person could be charged with inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, depending on what words they used.
Surely, if the person they are communicating with is over 16 then charges for sexual communication or inciting wouldn’t be able to be brought as the age limit for these offences is 16, its only image offences which have the higher age limit of 18.
Sexual Offences Act 2003 Communication
Sexual Offences Act 2003 Causing or inciting
As I was saying in another post it just shows how contradictory the laws are when different age limits apply to different offences.
Sexual Offences Act 2003 Communication
Sexual Offences Act 2003 Causing or inciting
As I was saying in another post it just shows how contradictory the laws are when different age limits apply to different offences.
edel2020
What would the consequences be outside of the legal system?
What would the consequences be outside of the legal system?
26a20
Requesting explicit images is illegal.
Requesting explicit images is illegal.
I think it may be a grey area, because requesting images in itself might constitute incitement, but as 26a20 says, incitement does not apply to 16 year olds.
An offence would be committed if an image were sent, or received though.
The non legal consequences are many, including possible involvement of social services.
An offence would be committed if an image were sent, or received though.
The non legal consequences are many, including possible involvement of social services.
As far as I can tell from my reading of the law asking a 16 or 17 year old for images is not illegal, whilst the request could be deemed sexual communication or inciting sexual activity, a 16/17 year old is by law considered old enough to consent to engage in sexual communication and sexual activity with whomever they wish.
Sending/recieving the image however would be illegal because the age limit for image offences extends to 18.
The only caveat I can think of where it might become illegal is if the adult was in a position of authority (teacher, youth worker etc) as the age limit for sexual activity then becomes 18, though I am unsure if this applies to communication or just physical sexual activity.
The only charge that I can think of which could be brought would be obscene publication but obviously that would depend on the content of the conversation.
Sending/recieving the image however would be illegal because the age limit for image offences extends to 18.
The only caveat I can think of where it might become illegal is if the adult was in a position of authority (teacher, youth worker etc) as the age limit for sexual activity then becomes 18, though I am unsure if this applies to communication or just physical sexual activity.
The only charge that I can think of which could be brought would be obscene publication but obviously that would depend on the content of the conversation.
edel2020
Would you have to move house?
Would you have to move house?
26a20
Asking for explicit images would not be legal.
Asking for explicit images would not be legal.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on that.
As I said based on reading the laws that I have linked too above I can see nothing which would make someone requesting images from someone who is 16+ illegal, if something is not specifically prohibited by law it must therefore be legal.
Sending or receiving the images, or requesting them from someone who is under 16 is absolutely illegal. But as far as I can tell requesting them from someone who is over 16 is whilst extremely inappropriate not illegal.
If you can direct me to the relevant legislation you believe makes this an offence I’m happy to be corrected.
As I said based on reading the laws that I have linked too above I can see nothing which would make someone requesting images from someone who is 16+ illegal, if something is not specifically prohibited by law it must therefore be legal.
Sending or receiving the images, or requesting them from someone who is under 16 is absolutely illegal. But as far as I can tell requesting them from someone who is over 16 is whilst extremely inappropriate not illegal.
If you can direct me to the relevant legislation you believe makes this an offence I’m happy to be corrected.
For the purposes of the law around indecent images of children, a child is defined as someone under the age of 18. There is an inconsistency with that with other legislation (including the age of ceonsent being 16), nevertheless it is what the law is.
This is a good source of information
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/indecent-and-prohibited-images-children
This is a good source of information
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/indecent-and-prohibited-images-children
Confused18
A person who is being investigated might have to leave the family home, if there are children living there. It would be up to social services to decide.
A person who is being investigated might have to leave the family home, if there are children living there. It would be up to social services to decide.
Mammabear
Its not clear who your post is aimed at. If it was in reply to what I have posted at no point have I suggested that having images of those 16+ is not illegal. Simply that I cannot see what offence has been committed by asking a person 16+ for images.
The page you link in your post is one I have read several times in the last 9 months and I still can’t see where it suggests an offence has occurred in this specific case.
As far as I can tell all the IIOC offences (making, possession, distribution and production) require one important thing to exist, an indecent image of someone under 18. That is the starting point for prosecuting under the IIOC legislation, no image = no offence. From what the original poster has written it was only a request which was made no image was ever produced.
I believe none of the offences listed in the sexual offences act (communication, causing or inciting, arranging or facilitating etc) are relevant as the child is over 16 and therefore able to consent to sexual activity in their own right.
The only offence on that page which may be relevant is Section 45/45 Serious Crime Act 2007 – Encouraging or assisting an offence. However the way that it reads on the CPS page is that the offence needs to have been committed in the first place for someone to be able to assist with it i.e. the child would have needed to take an indecent image of themselves under the encouragement of the other person, as far as we know in this instance this has not happened.
That said this is all my own opinion based on how I have read and interpreted the legislation, the same for everyone who is suggesting an offence may have been committed based on their interpretation of the law.
Its not clear who your post is aimed at. If it was in reply to what I have posted at no point have I suggested that having images of those 16+ is not illegal. Simply that I cannot see what offence has been committed by asking a person 16+ for images.
The page you link in your post is one I have read several times in the last 9 months and I still can’t see where it suggests an offence has occurred in this specific case.
As far as I can tell all the IIOC offences (making, possession, distribution and production) require one important thing to exist, an indecent image of someone under 18. That is the starting point for prosecuting under the IIOC legislation, no image = no offence. From what the original poster has written it was only a request which was made no image was ever produced.
I believe none of the offences listed in the sexual offences act (communication, causing or inciting, arranging or facilitating etc) are relevant as the child is over 16 and therefore able to consent to sexual activity in their own right.
The only offence on that page which may be relevant is Section 45/45 Serious Crime Act 2007 – Encouraging or assisting an offence. However the way that it reads on the CPS page is that the offence needs to have been committed in the first place for someone to be able to assist with it i.e. the child would have needed to take an indecent image of themselves under the encouragement of the other person, as far as we know in this instance this has not happened.
That said this is all my own opinion based on how I have read and interpreted the legislation, the same for everyone who is suggesting an offence may have been committed based on their interpretation of the law.
It wasnt aimed at anyone in particular, just commenting that the law is a bit confusing in this area. I think the point i was trying to make was that while requesting an image of someone 16 or 17 might not be illegal (though obviously very inappropriate) as communication and contcat offences relate to under 16s only, if you actually received one it would be an offence as IIOC is under 18s.
edel2020
I mean vigilantes.
I mean vigilantes.
Confused18
If you mean does a person have to leave their home if they are subject to a vigilante sting, then the answer is no, because the police should protect them from any protesters.
But if that person is arrested by the police, then it could become a a safeguarding issue for any children living in the house. Social services might tell them to leave, until the police investigation is complete.
If you mean does a person have to leave their home if they are subject to a vigilante sting, then the answer is no, because the police should protect them from any protesters.
But if that person is arrested by the police, then it could become a a safeguarding issue for any children living in the house. Social services might tell them to leave, until the police investigation is complete.