header-logo header-logo

Flawed law

06 May 2015 / Samantha Pegg
Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

The new “revenge porn” offence is only a partial solution, says Samantha Pegg

The disclosure of private sexual images, particularly by aggrieved ex-partners, is not a new phenomenon, but their ubiquitous presence on the internet has made it all the more galling for victims. Is the new “revenge porn” offence really the best way of preventing victimisation or is it an easy answer to a complex problem?

As has been recognised by various commentators victims of revenge porn already have civil remedies available to them and disclosing a pornographic image may also be an offence under the Communications Act 2003 or the Malicious Communications Act 1988. Disclosing or threatening to disclose private sexual images can also amount to an offence under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 where there is a course of conduct. 

The new “revenge porn” offence at s 33 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 is actually titled the rather less snappy “disclosing private sexual photographs and films with intent to cause distress” and requires the disclosure of these images to someone

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll