Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Prosecuted for receiving something unwanted and deleteing.

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    punisher5112
    Registered Users Posts: 24,647 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    Dodge wrote: »
    You don’t honestly believe she was prosecuted *solely* for receiving a message in a group, do you?!?

    Well I certainly hope not but maybe there is more to it, I wasn't lead to believe there is unless I've missed something in the report.


  • Options
    #33
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    punisher5112 wrote: »
    You know what I mean, very rarely have gotten any back up and I've been wrongfully put through the system with made up statements, names of witnesses changed and footage corrupt and any footage given was 20 minutes after the incident.

    Gsoc, if you have any issues with Garda investigations


  • Options
    #34
    punisher5112
    Registered Users Posts: 24,647 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Gsoc, if you have any issues with Garda investigations

    I was advised to let it go by solicitor as there was more to it.

    Happened on the job too.

    Opened my eyes though as I was too trusting and forthcoming.


  • Options
    #35
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    punisher5112 wrote: »
    I was advised to let it go by solicitor as there was more to it.

    Happened on the job too.

    Opened my eyes though as I was too trusting and forthcoming.

    You should get another solicitor!


  • Options
    #36
    punisher5112
    Registered Users Posts: 24,647 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    bubblypop wrote: »
    You should get another solicitor!

    Too long ago now went on from 2014 to 2016 in court 4 times.

    I had to take on board what I was advised as there was the real threat of me losing my job and as I'd be in the area all the time that I would be targeted....

    He works out of pierce at and is the most obnoxious and vindictive person I've ever come across.

    He even used the Gaurd that dealt with me as a witness stating he seen me doing what they said but yet the Gaurd hadn't a clue when he came to me. He even was joking and laughing with me and as the offence was so serious I actually wouldn't have been let carry on....

    Madness


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    ecoli3136 wrote: »
    You can't resolve this on the basis of a media report of a sentencing hearing. The information is incomplete for two reasons.

    Oh I know very well and have pointed out this before, but, to be fair the IT and Declan Brennan are fairly on the ball with such reporting (now if it was the Daily Mail or The Sun etc I wouldn't even bother making comment).

    Being a CC criminal prosecution with a guilty plead there will unlikely be any further reading on the issue as any involvement of the higher courts is unlikely so it's all we have to go on.

    But back to the point I made in relation to a potential issue of mens rea as raised by STC, based on the facts we have (assuming that is all to the issue) the knowledge of possession can indeed be satisfied objectively.


  • Options
    #38
    hierro
    Registered Users Posts: 142 ✭✭hierro


    Quilty plea, summary of the facts so impossible look to look to deep into it.

    Forensic acquisiton of mobile phones recovers deleted images etc. Metadata is recovered which would likely prove reciept and deletion.

    If the image/video was deleted by the defendant and recovered wouldn't that have to make a prosecution unlikely and a never a quilty plea.

    There's something missing in the article and story which makes this a wholely implausible story and hard to draw conclusions upon it. People with folders of stuff have recieved similar sentences.


  • Options
    #39
    CIARAN_BOYLE
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 14,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭CIARAN_BOYLE


    hierro wrote: »
    Quilty plea, summary of the facts so impossible look to look to deep into it.

    Forensic acquisiton of mobile phones recovers deleted images etc. Metadata is recovered which would likely prove reciept and deletion.

    If the image/video was deleted by the defendant and recovered wouldn't that have to make a prosecution unlikely and a never a quilty plea.

    There's something missing in the article and story which makes this a wholely implausible story and hard to draw conclusions upon it. People with folders of stuff have recieved similar sentences.

    4 month suspended sentence is light enough. Which is consistent with the facts of the case.

    Being found guilty is what it is and means she won't work in the field she wanted to work (childcare) at all during her life as she won't pass garda vetting.


  • Options
    #40
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,576 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    I deleted a whatsapp image last night to see what happened and what options it gave me, and I didn't get the already-ticked 'delete media file' option somebody else mentioned, so I don't think we can be sure she actually untick that option.


  • Options
    #41
    AlanG
    Registered Users Posts: 1,415 ✭✭✭AlanG


    She pleaded guilty so there must have been some evidence that she knowingly stored the data. Anyone who gets a video showing the rape of a child and does nothing about it certainly shouldn't be working in childcare so i think the outcome of this case is good for society. Hopefully they can track down the person who sent it to her.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,361 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    osarusan wrote: »
    I deleted a whatsapp image last night to see what happened and what options it gave me, and I didn't get the already-ticked 'delete media file' option somebody else mentioned, so I don't think we can be sure she actually untick that option.

    It's when you delete the message within WhatsApp that you get the popup screen about deleting the associated image. If you delete the image as an individual file outside WhatsApp (as I do frequently as housekeeping), there is no interaction with WhatsApp.

    The lady in this case claimed she deleted the message which contained the image so she should have seen the WhatsApp popup screen.


  • Options
    #43
    AAAAAAAAA
    Registered Users Posts: 255 ✭✭AAAAAAAAA


    More of a tech question than a legal question, but is there a difference in behaviour between android and iOS on this? Does Android have the pop-up to delete the media from the phone, where the iOS version simply removes it from the app as it doesn't have permission to modify saved files?

    If this is the case, I can see well why she would have been in the belief the video was completely destroyed.


  • Options
    #44
    CiaranIRE
    Registered Users Posts: 50 ✭✭CiaranIRE


    Putting everything aside like should she have reported it...

    If the video was stored in the system files(swap, temp files, cache or whatever, but not camera roll), I presume it would have been difficult/impossible to charge her if she had an iPhone as this would have been inaccessible to user without jailbreaking, but on an Android phone it's possible to browse the file system?

    Seems really harsh unless there's more too it..

    ...and then again, what would stop another person saving everything to a system folder and playing innocent.

    Strange case.


  • Options
    #45
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,361 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    AAAAAAAAA wrote: »
    If this is the case, I can see well why she would have been in the belief the video was completely destroyed.

    Good point.

    Except..... while represented by a legal team led by a Senior Counsel, she pleaded guilty to this crime......

    6.—(1) Without prejudice to section 5 (1)(e) and subject to subsections (2) and (3), any person who knowingly possesses any child pornography shall be guilty of an offence

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1998/act/22/section/6/enacted/en/html#sec6

    By her plea, she admitted that she was 'knowingly' in possession of the offending material. In plain English, she knew it was there.

    My guess is that if she had pleaded not guilty, the prosecution had an abundance of other evidence against her. She knew she was cornered and, on legal advice, pleaded guilty to one offence.

    So can we please stop speculating that she didn't know the file was still on her phone?


  • Options
    #46
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    AAAAAAAAA wrote: »
    More of a tech question than a legal question, but is there a difference in behaviour between android and iOS on this? Does Android have the pop-up to delete the media from the phone, where the iOS version simply removes it from the app as it doesn't have permission to modify saved files?

    If this is the case, I can see well why she would have been in the belief the video was completely destroyed.


    On my Android phone running Android 10, deletion in Whatsapp (default aettings) works as follows:

    (a) select image in the chat.

    (b) tap the trash can.

    (c) A dialogue box opens with the Text "Delete Message from [sender]?" and a tick box which offers the option of "Delete media in this chat".

    (d) There are also the options of "Cancel" or "Delete for Me" provided. That is, assuming you are not an admin of the chat when you also get the "Delete for Everyone" option.

    (e) If I tick the box for "Delete media in this chat" and then select "Delete for me", the image is deleted from the Whatsapp chat and from a sub-folder in my Gallery which Whatsapp presumably created called "Whatsapp images" where all images I view in Whatsapp chats appear to be automatically stored (there are similar folders called "Whatsapp Animated Gifs" and "Whatsapp Video")

    (e) If I don't tick the box for "Delete media in this chat" then the Delete function works to delete it from the chat but the image remains in the "Whatsapp Images" folder.

    I have to say, it is less than clear to a user who hasn't addressed their mind to this (like me until this morning), based on all of that, that failing to tick the box leaves the image accessible from the Whatsapp sub-folders, even if it is deleted from the chat. I would accept that a person might not appreciate that a deletion from chat without ticking the box leaves the image/video on your phone, if they had not noticed the Whatsapp Image folders (which is a whole other question).

    Edited to add - while I was aware of the Whatsapp sub-folders in my Gallery app, until I checked the process myself this morning, I was not specifically conscious of the fact that deleting from the chat left the image or whatever in the Whatsapp sub-folders. I've actually never bothered to delete a message or an image from Whatsapp until this morning when I tried it this morning (which perhaps tells you how dull but unambiguously lawful my Whatsapp chats are).

    I am not particularly technical but I would assume that aside from all that the phone could be forensically examined with a view to recovering images that were downloaded but deleted, much like any data storage device.

    Notwithstanding the quirky delete function as I have found it to be, I would still point out that, as I said previously, the accused knew the nature of the case against her, had a full legal team to advise her, and chose to plead guilty to knowingly possessing child pornography.

    I was just interested to check out how the delete function works myself based on some of what has been said and what is reported as having been said in court. I don't have an iPhone to compare OS.


  • Options
    #47
    Dodge
    Registered Users Posts: 10,201 ✭✭✭✭Dodge


    iPhone you can just select the media and delete it

    If you have your settings to save all media (the default setting), it will also be saved in your photos and will have to be deleted there (separately, by clicking on the photos app/icon etc)

    It isn’t as coylemj posted above and I could easily see how some forget it’s auto saved


  • Options
    #48
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,361 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    Dodge wrote: »
    iPhone you can just select the media and delete it

    Same on Android.
    Dodge wrote: »
    It isn’t as coylemj posted above and I could easily see how some forget it’s auto saved

    Can you elaborate - what did I say that you find fault with?

    What I said was that if you delete the WhatsApp message, it offers to delete the associated media file. And you have to untick the option to retain the image or video file. So you cannot claim that the file was retained without your knowledge.

    And she pleaded guilty to the crime of 'knowingly' being in possession of child pornography so I really can't see why we're still flogging this dead horse.


  • Options
    #49
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    coylemj wrote: »
    Same on Android.



    Can you elaborate - what did I say that you find fault with?

    What I said was that if you delete the WhatsApp message, it offers to delete the associated media file. And you have to untick the option to retain the image or video file. So you cannot claim that the file was retained without your knowledge.

    And she pleaded guilty to the crime of 'knowingly' being in possession of child pornography so I really can't see why we're still flogging this dead horse.

    On my phone (android 10, WhatsApp default settings), as described above, you have to tick the box to delete from a WhatsApp folder of saved images. I suspect it depends on your settings.

    The default option is that it does not delete from there.

    You said previously that the default was that the delete function would delete from the chat AND the saved media folder so that she must have consciously selected the option of only deleting from the chat, which "may have been her downfall" or something odd like that.

    It's not a dead horse. This a discussion forum and you offered an erroneous analysis of the case being discussed based on your flawed understanding on how WhatsApp works (which may reflect settings on your device, but not everyone elses).


  • Options
    #50
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,361 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    ecoli3136 wrote: »
    On my phone (android 10, WhatsApp default settings), as described above, you have to tick the box to delete from a
    WhatsApp folder of saved images. I suspect it depends on your settings.

    I wasn't talking about deleting the image from the 'WhatsApp folder of save images', I was talking about what happens when you delete the original WhatsApp message itself.

    When you highlight a WhatsApp message and click the bin (delete) icon, a popup panel asks you to confirm or cancel the delete and an (already ticked) option says 'Delete media in this chat'. You have to untick that box to retain the media.
    ecoli3136 wrote: »
    You said previously that the default was that the delete function would delete from the chat AND the saved media folder so that she must have consciously selected the option of only deleting from the chat, which "may have been her downfall" or something odd like that.

    I did. See my response to your next comment......
    ecoli3136 wrote: »
    It's not a dead horse. This a discussion forum and you offered an erroneous analysis of the case being discussed based on your flawed understanding on how WhatsApp works (which may reflect settings on your device, but not everyone elses).

    I simply laid out what happens when you delete a WhatsApp message. My phone is running Android 9 and the latest version of WhatsApp. I haven't changed any settings which would affect what happens when you delete a message.

    The woman in the case said that she had deleted the original message. But the offending file was still on her phone. Which means that when she deleted the message, she unticked the option to delete the movie. That is to say, she made a conscious decision to keep the movie file.

    What is 'flawed' about that conclusion?


  • Options
    #51
    Still waters
    Registered Users Posts: 1,166 ✭✭✭Still waters


    When i delete messages from WhatsApp i dont untick the box and the image is still in my gallery, i have to go into gallery and delete again, why is this?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,048 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Think about this scenario.

    If it was a defence that people receive a video, simply say that’s horrible. Delete the person then keep it on their device, then that would mean possession is not a crime.


  • Options
    #53
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users Posts: 35,814 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    What right did they have to seize her phone in first place when she wasn't the reason they went to that house, and what right did they have to unlock her phone and snoop/ Surely those two actions were illegal in the eyes of the law? Seems in Ireland they make up the laws as they go along


  • Options
    #54
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users Posts: 35,814 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    joeguevara wrote: »
    Think about this scenario.

    If it was a defence that people receive a video, simply say that’s horrible. Delete the person then keep it on their device, then that would mean possession is not a crime.


    I think the point is she deleted it, but deep in the phone somewhere is still existed in the memory?

    My phone is a k800i lol . I have no idea, but it said she deleted it, I guess a smartphone is like a pc, it's never deleted truly.


  • Options
    #55
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,361 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    BorneTobyWilde wrote: »
    What right did they have to seize her phone in first place when she wasn't the reason they went to that house, and what right did they have to unlock her phone and snoop/ Surely those two actions were illegal in the eyes of the law? Seems in Ireland they make up the laws as they go along

    I think the logic is that when they have a search warrant, they can search and/or seize anything in the house. Otherwise, a criminal could claim that all of the electronic gear in the house was owned by his partner and children and then the cops couldn't touch them. Which, in this day and age, would render a search warrant useless.


  • Options
    #56
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,048 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    BorneTobyWilde wrote: »
    I think the point is she deleted it, but deep in the phone somewhere is still existed in the memory?

    My phone is a k800i lol . I have no idea, but it said she deleted it, I guess a smartphone is like a pc, it's never deleted truly.

    The crux is knowingly possessed it. I think people’s judgement is being clouded by the fact she is a woman and It appears plausible. But why didn’t she report it to the police.

    She received a video. It was illegal. On her phone. And she never reported it to the police.


  • Options
    #57
    Quantum Erasure
    Registered Users Posts: 8,291 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure


    coylemj wrote: »
    I simply laid out what happens when you delete a WhatsApp message. My phone is running Android 9 and the latest version of WhatsApp. I haven't changed any settings which would affect what happens when you delete a message.

    The woman in the case said that she had deleted the original message. But the offending file was still on her phone. Which means that when she deleted the message, she unticked the option to delete the movie. That is to say, she made a conscious decision to keep the movie file.

    What is 'flawed' about that conclusion?

    not everyone has the same Operating System, the latest version OS, the latest version of Whatsapp. functionality changes...
    joeguevara wrote: »
    She received a video. It was illegal. On her phone. And she never reported it to the police.

    ...and that's not a crime


  • Options
    #58
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,048 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Quantum Erasure wrote: »
    not everyone has the same Operating System, the latest version OS, the latest version of Whatsapp. functionality changes...



    ...and that's not a crime

    I didn’t mean it was a crime but would have been a defence if they said they didn’t know it was not deleted.


  • Options
    #59
    Yurt2
    Registered Users Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/what-should-you-do-if-you-receive-a-video-of-child-abuse-1.4161875

    A striking sentance in this article:

    "Ireland has some of the strictest child pornography law in Europe and the DPP and Garda are typically eager to see it enforced to the fullest extent. Cases like Omorouyi’s are “not bad” as a way of warning people about this, the garda said."

    With the facts that are in the public domain at the moment (unless there is something else that is going unreported), had she contested the charges, I don't think you would have gotten a jury to find her to be in 'knowing' possesion of the material.

    Perhaps she was poorly advised by her counsel. I'd tend to lean in that direction.


  • Options
    #60
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,167 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Yurt! wrote: »
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/what-should-you-do-if-you-receive-a-video-of-child-abuse-1.4161875

    A striking sentance in this article:

    "Ireland has some of the strictest child pornography law in Europe and the DPP and Garda are typically eager to see it enforced to the fullest extent. Cases like Omorouyi’s are “not bad” as a way of warning people about this, the garda said."

    With the facts that are in the public domain at the moment (unless there is something else that is going unreported), had she contested the charges, I don't think you would have gotten a jury to find her to be in 'knowing' possesion of the material.

    Perhaps she was poorly advised by her counsel. I'd tend to lean in that direction.
    Though bear in mind the possiblity - the likelihood, even - that her counsel had knowledge of facts that are not in the public domain (but were within the knowledge of the prosecution).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    coylemj wrote: »
    What is 'flawed' about that conclusion?

    Your phone =/= everyone's phone.

    I


Advertisement