s. 43 of the Telecommunications Act 1984 of improper use of public telecommunications systems.
the question is - is it necessary to prove intent?
what are the mens rea requirements to convict someone for this offence.
would it still be a offence if the defendat did not intend to cause ditress or anxierty to the victim
2007-03-06 00:16:45 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
The offender must also intend that "annoyance, inconvenience, or needless anxiety" is caused by sending the false message. It is not enough fo the prosecution to show that such annoyance is the likely outcome of your phone call. If you can convince the court that you did not intend such annoyance etc, then they must acquit you even if people were annoyed or inconvenienced by the call. Note the contrast here to Section 5 Public Order Act 1986, where the prosecution only need to prove that harassment, alarm or distress was likely to be caused.
This is from the comment to the legislation. Check of the full explanation at the link below.
2007-03-06 00:28:18 · answer #1 · answered by bestguessing 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋