Two Northern Irish cops face Computer Misuse Act charges over Twitter trolling campaign

Prosecutors considering evidence for a number of offences

Northern Irish prosecutors are pondering whether to charge two police officers with Computer Misuse Act offences after what local reports described as a Twitter trolling campaign.

Local politicians and lawyers were said to have been targeted by a Twitter account called @DonYeeoo – and its operators also allegedly tweeted information that only police officers could have known.

Belfast Live reported the probe, which appears to have broadened to include the Computer Misuse Act (CMA) since it was first opened in 2017.

In a statement, a Police Ombudsman's office spokesman told the Northern Irish news website: "In July 2020, the Police Ombudsman submitted files to the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) following an investigation into complaints about the conduct of police officers in relation to their use of social media."

It continued: "Files relating to two police officers were submitted to the PPS to consider if there was sufficient evidence to prosecute the officers for the offences of misconduct in a public office, harassment, unlawful breaches of the Data Protection Act, unlawful breaches of the Computer Misuse Act and theft."

The inclusion of potential CMA charges is unusual in a social media case. Normally the act is used (in mainland Britain) as a sweeping-up provision for offenders whose online crimes don't easily fall under other laws. For example, a woman who deleted 5,000 files from her former business associate's Dropbox account, causing his new company to fail, was convicted under the CMA (and received a suspended sentence).

Raw numbers of CMA prosecutions in England and Wales are low. Last year prosecutions for computer misuse offences actually declined, despite a reported increase in computer-dependent crimes during the pandemic as the world switched to remote working.

On the flip side, of the 45 prosecutions brought in 2020 a full 95 per cent resulted in a guilty verdict or plea by the defendant – even though it was the lowest number of court charges brought under the CMA since 2013.

Although the CMA was written to deal with criminal online intruders, the number of true so-called "blackhat" crimes dealt with under the act is relatively low. One such example of a script kiddie feeling the force of the law was in June, when Bradley Niblock was banned from using Tor or registering "vanity" handles on social media platforms.

Niblock was a member of black-hat crew Lizard Squad, mostly composed of younger Britons doing idiotic things to show off to each other. Inevitably their DDoSing caught the eye of the police and Crown Prosecution Service. ®

Other stories you might like

  • DMCA can't be used to sidestep First Amendment, court rules
    Anonymous speech protections apply online too, and copyright can't diminish that

    It's been a good week for free speech advocates as a judge ruled that copyright law cannot be used to circumvent First Amendment anonymity protections.

    The decision from the US District Court for the Northern District of California overturns a previous ruling that compelled Twitter to unmask an anonymous user accused of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). 

    The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which filed a joint amicus brief with the ACLU in support of Twitter's position, said the ruling confirms "that copyright holders issuing subpoenas under the DMCA must still meet the Constitution's test before identifying anonymous speakers." 

    Continue reading
  • SpaceX staff condemn Musk's behavior in open letter
    Well, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why

    A group of employees at SpaceX wrote an open letter to COO and president Gwynne Shotwell denouncing owner Elon Musk's public behavior and calling for the rocket company to "swiftly and explicitly separate itself" from his personal brand.

    The letter, which was acquired through anonymous SpaceX sources, calls Musk's recent behavior in the public sphere a source of distraction and embarrassment. Musk's tweets, the writers argue, are de facto company statements because "Elon is seen as the face of SpaceX."

    Musk's freewheeling tweets have landed him in hot water on multiple occasions – one incident even leaving him unable to tweet about Tesla without a lawyer's review and approval. 

    Continue reading
  • Musk repeats threat to end $46.5bn Twitter deal – with lawyers, not just tweets
    Right as Texas AG sticks his oar in

    Elon Musk is prepared to terminate his takeover of Twitter, reiterating his claim that the social media biz is covering up the number of spam and fake bot accounts on the site, lawyers representing the Tesla CEO said on Monday.

    Musk offered to acquire Twitter for $54.20 per share in an all-cash deal worth over $44 billion in April. Twitter's board members resisted his attempt to take the company private but eventually accepted the deal. Musk then sold $8.4 billion worth of his Tesla shares, secured another $7.14 billion from investors to try and collect the $21 billion he promised to front himself. Tesla's stock price has been falling since this saga began while Twitter shares gained and then tailed downward.

    Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others promised to loan the remaining $25.5 billion from via debt financing. The takeover appeared imminent as rumors swirled over how Musk wanted to make Twitter profitable and take it public again in a future IPO. But the tech billionaire got cold feet and started backing away from the deal last month, claiming it couldn't go forward unless Twitter proved fake accounts make up less than five per cent of all users – a stat Twitter claimed and Musk believes is higher.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022