5 ms·

This is a criminal offence in the UK, providing intent can be proven. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/67 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukp

This is a criminal offence in the UK, providing intent can be proven. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/67 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/67

tomp 9y ago
"I'm sorry judge, I really didn't know! How could have I known that my cheap motion detector sold from China had an embedded spy cam?! When I was installing it, I just wanted to plug in all the cables and the internet plug was the only one that fit, computers are meant to be user-friendly like this..."
- maxerickson 9y ago
  Are UK judges that credulous?
  - Silhouette 9y ago
    UK judges are generally very reasonable in my experience (though I should acknowledge that my experience is limited to being an observer or witness in a small number of cases). If something really does seem like an honest mistake, they may take that into account when passing a sentence. On the other hand, if someone not only did something bad but then the judge thinks they tried to cover it up even in court, that is likely to count against them, possibly heavily.
    - maxerickson 9y ago
      Right, the other poster's story is along the same lines as someone claiming that they like to shadowbox in the street when they get drunk.
  - tialaramex 9y ago
    In most cases it doesn't matter what the judge believes about you, what matters is what the prosecutor can prove to a jury, and whether the defence can introduce that vital "shadow of a doubt". Can one of a dozen average citizens believe this story ? For minor things a panel of magistrates (non-lawyers who volunteered for this job, a clerk helps them understand what the law means and they can "punt" tricky things to a judge if they have to) decides, rather than a jury under supervision of a judge. Magistrates only handle little things, shop lifting, ordinary burglary, punch up in a night club with a few bruises, that sort of thing. No murders, armed robberies, rapes. But I don't know if "spy camera voyeurism" is something that'd go to a magistrate's court. If the only thing the prosecution has is this - you owned this device, and somebody found it, you say you didn't know what it does - there's actually a good chance they would never take it before a court. Crown Prosecutors are specifically told only to prosecute people who they're sure they can prove are guilty - none of this throw everything at them and hope it sticks nonsense, "Innocent" verdicts are actually rare in this system, not because hardly anybody is innocent but because prosecutors are supposed to be bringing slam-dunk cases. I actually attend court periodically, and as an outsider, not a member of a jury, I'd say I never saw one person in the dock who didn't do it. Anyway most of the time the police are going to find other stuff, which the prosecution can use to make a more solid case. That might be really definitive, like a test video you recorded, or a forum post you made saying you are "going to try it for real soon" on a spy camera voyeur site. Or it might be circumstantial but still able to be shown to a jury, like your search history "Spy cam bedroom sex" "Secret recordings" "Voyeur tiny camera", or they found the box the device came in, and it says "Spy camera: Most excellent definiton for make video" in big letters.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

This is a criminal offence in the UK, providing intent can be proven. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/67 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/67

tomp 9y ago

"I'm sorry judge, I really didn't know! How could have I known that my cheap motion detector sold from China had an embedded spy cam?! When I was installing it, I just wanted to plug in all the cables and the internet plug was the only one that fit, computers are meant to be user-friendly like this..."

maxerickson 9y ago
Are UK judges that credulous?
- Silhouette 9y ago
  UK judges are generally very reasonable in my experience (though I should acknowledge that my experience is limited to being an observer or witness in a small number of cases). If something really does seem like an honest mistake, they may take that into account when passing a sentence. On the other hand, if someone not only did something bad but then the judge thinks they tried to cover it up even in court, that is likely to count against them, possibly heavily.
  - maxerickson 9y ago
    Right, the other poster's story is along the same lines as someone claiming that they like to shadowbox in the street when they get drunk.
- tialaramex 9y ago
  In most cases it doesn't matter what the judge believes about you, what matters is what the prosecutor can prove to a jury, and whether the defence can introduce that vital "shadow of a doubt". Can one of a dozen average citizens believe this story ? For minor things a panel of magistrates (non-lawyers who volunteered for this job, a clerk helps them understand what the law means and they can "punt" tricky things to a judge if they have to) decides, rather than a jury under supervision of a judge. Magistrates only handle little things, shop lifting, ordinary burglary, punch up in a night club with a few bruises, that sort of thing. No murders, armed robberies, rapes. But I don't know if "spy camera voyeurism" is something that'd go to a magistrate's court. If the only thing the prosecution has is this - you owned this device, and somebody found it, you say you didn't know what it does - there's actually a good chance they would never take it before a court. Crown Prosecutors are specifically told only to prosecute people who they're sure they can prove are guilty - none of this throw everything at them and hope it sticks nonsense, "Innocent" verdicts are actually rare in this system, not because hardly anybody is innocent but because prosecutors are supposed to be bringing slam-dunk cases. I actually attend court periodically, and as an outsider, not a member of a jury, I'd say I never saw one person in the dock who didn't do it. Anyway most of the time the police are going to find other stuff, which the prosecution can use to make a more solid case. That might be really definitive, like a test video you recorded, or a forum post you made saying you are "going to try it for real soon" on a spy camera voyeur site. Or it might be circumstantial but still able to be shown to a jury, like your search history "Spy cam bedroom sex" "Secret recordings" "Voyeur tiny camera", or they found the box the device came in, and it says "Spy camera: Most excellent definiton for make video" in big letters.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]