Orville Taylor | Naked truth about cyber images

Nothing is funny about a naked female, catching her last breath, while other persons look on and ogle in some macabre sense of curiosity. Not only is it simply cruel and distasteful, but more importantly, it is illegal. Our 2015 Cybercrimes Act, is very explicit about the misuse of images and information across the Internet to embarrass or reduce the stature of any individual.

Indeed, I am in agreement with the prime minister, when he suggested that we needed strong and even criminal sanctions, for the spreading of false and malicious information in cyberspace. Just like the spent arrow and the spoken word, once posted in the virtual world, images, videos and audio, can never be retrieved.

In any event, once you see or hear something, it cannot be unheard or unseen.

Section 9(1) of the act is very explicit. “A person commits an offence if that person … uses a computer to send to another person any data … that is obscene, constitutes a threat, or is menacing in nature; and (b) … is reckless as to whether the sending of the data causes, annoyance, inconvenience, distress, or anxiety, to that person or any other person.” The very spirit of that act makes it clear that the virtual community is not a space for harmful behaviour.

It is particularly offensive, disrespectful and the violation of everything decent about a human being, for an individual, whatever be his status or occupation, to publish or distribute any image of another person in circumstances where it is inconceivable that permission should be given.

As a matter of fact, several cases have been determined, including at least two locally, where an apparently wilful participant in the taking of nude images of an individual, was awarded major compensation, because a nasty person, with whom she had an erstwhile intimate relationship, that went sour, let his mind follow suit. These acts of recrimination come from a deep sick place in the absent heart of persons, who simply cannot accept that they do not own two lives.

VOYEURS

Sad to say, there are also voyeurs, and master reprobates, who pry into people’s private spaces and hack or steal pictures and use them for their sinister deeds. And that is bad enough. But, when a guardian of our laws violates this trust, it is infinitely reprehensible.

Long gone are the days when as a teenager, not yet adept at controlling his testosterone, random pictures of videos of women not known to him, were interesting or desired. What could possibly make a police officer, in the middle of an operation in pursuit of criminal suspects, be so distracted as to record a video of an adult woman fully dressed in her birthday suit?

Now, I am open to the possibility that the person who made the video, was not actually a member of the police party, and could be some other creature in the room, who felt it was in their interest to make such a recording. Investigations by the high command have been promised, and hopefully we will see them coming to a conclusion to identify the perpetrator, whether a member of the Constabulary or otherwise. Notably, however, the victim alleges that she was recorded by police officers, and on the face of it, a reasonable bystander would conclude that she is telling the truth.

If it is found that this story is exactly as she says; then the officer would have not just committed an offence under the Act but also he would be subject to myriad charges, including at a minimum, bringing the Constabulary into disrepute.

And in all of this, the story gets worse. A week earlier, one of the most horrific scenes played out in the home of a teenager, where she was sexually assaulted and murdered by someone described initially as a ‘man of unsound mind’. Without any evidence to support the asserted mental condition of the individual, all that is known is that he is a male and committed the heinous crime. Worst of all, not only did this child die, but along with her unfortunate and sad demise, decency and whatever modicum of humanity surrounding her onlookers, also perished.

Not having seen the tape myself, nor am I inclined to, reports are that as the teen, still barely alive lay while taking her last sips of breath, someone was making a mini movie about her.

LOST OUR MINDS

This is crazy! There is no circumstance under which such a recording should have taken place and clearly we have lost our minds, if we had any at all in the beginning.

True, there is a lot of outrage and some well-thinking individuals wanting to share with others just how horrific this crime was, simply wanted to alert others; and that is understandable.

However, not only is this wrong according to the norms of decency but absolutely contrary to the provision of the Child Care and Protection Act (CCPA), and more importantly, the Child Pornography (Prevention) Act [CPPA] of 2009.

From time to time, I have had to acquaint or reacquaint my friends and colleagues, unfortunately, including people who should know better, that inasmuch as other statutes allow for a child of 16 years, to give sexual consent, the interesting twist under the CPPA, is that she cannot send any kind of photograph, video or electronic recording, including sound which exposes her body or genitalia, or with her in a position suggesting some sexual type of activity taking place.

The law is also very clear about sharing any kind of image in circumstances where a child is being or has been sexually abused. There is no question that what was done in recording and forwarding this ghastly image multiple times, is a crime under this legislation. Anything which, “…depicts a child being subjected to torture, cruelty or physical abuse in a sexual context…” is child pornography under this statute.

Some people genuinely do not know better; but those who do …?

Dr Orville Taylor is senior lecturer at the Department of Sociology at The University of the West Indies, a radio talk-show host, and author of ‘Broken Promises, Hearts and Pockets’. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and tayloronblackline@hotmail.com.