Forum: Author Hangout

I need some help

REP 🚫

I am working on a story related to malicious use of the internet by a small group of English citizens that are targeting two US citizens. The group's activities have caused problems for the government in the past. Public knowledge of their activities would further embarrass the government. Due to the possibility of embarrassment and the known members' positions in English society and the government, the incidents and their involvement was suppressed.

I looked at the National Crime Agency (NCA) and it didn't seem right. Based on what I found it seems they only investigate Cyber Crime. What the group is doing is more Cyber Bullying, but that does not appear to be a crime in England.

What government agency(ies) in England would investigate this type of activity if they receive a complaint from the FBI (or other US agency).

Replies: joyR Mushroom bk69

joyR 🚫

@REP

National Crime Agency

Though there are other parties who might well get involved.

Replies: REP

REP 🚫

@joyR

I had found the NCA, but that group seems to address crimes, especially organized crime. It doesn't seem like the right group to investigate bullying, which isn't a crime in the UK.

Replies: joyR

joyR 🚫
Updated:

@REP

Actually it is a crime. As with many other offences, various laws would be invoked, dependant upon context etc.

The Metropolitan Police have a cyber crimes unit and being in London, would most likely be involved, various regional units exist and one or more might be involved if suspects are based in their areas.

A lot depends upon the seriousness of the bullying, those involved, who is approached for action etc etc. Just like any other incident.

Bear in mind that if your story is contemporary, since the US refused to hand over Anne Sacoolas, who hit and killed a 19 year old with her car then claimed diplomatic immunity, it might be that those contacted in the UK because two US kids are being bullied, might not be as motivated as the US might expect...?

Replies: REP StarFleet Carl Ernest Bywater

REP 🚫
Updated:

@joyR

Actually it is a crime.

Thanks.

According to the Anti-Bullying Alliance:

There is no legal definition of cyberbullying within UK law. However there are a number of existing laws that can be applied to cases of cyberbullying and online harassment, namely:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

Malicious Communications Act 1988

Communications Act 2003

Breach of the Peace (Scotland)

Defamation Act 2013

StarFleet Carl 🚫

@joyR

since the US refused to hand over Anne Sacoolas, who hit and killed a 19 year old with her car then claimed diplomatic immunity,

According to what I've read about this ... technically at the time of the accident, she DID have diplomatic immunity. Her HUSBAND could have been charged, but there was an agreement that family members of people stationed at that base had diplomatic immunity. That's been changed since earlier this year, but you can't make it retroactive.

Replies: Dominions Son awnlee jawking

Dominions Son 🚫

@StarFleet Carl

@joyR

since the US refused to hand over Anne Sacoolas, who hit and killed a 19 year old with her car then claimed diplomatic immunity,

According to what I've read about this ... technically at the time of the accident, she DID have diplomatic immunity.

And the US authorities wouldn't have refused to extradite over for something like that if the US State Department didn't consider her as qualifying for diplomatic immunity.

Replies: bk69

bk69 🚫

@Dominions Son

Actually, no country in the world should turn over individuals who are protected by diplomatic immunity. The proper response to the commission of a crime by someone in possession of diplomatic immunity is clear - declare said individual PNG and escort individual to nearest airport.

Now, if the individual is a serial rapist, or is guilty of first degree murder... then you can try to get their homeland to waive immunity, but diplomatic immunity is one of the basic aspects of diplomacy. It's universal, like doctor-patient/lawyer-client/priest-mafioso confidentiality. No diplomat wants a precedent of waiving immunity for criminalization of traffic accidents...

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@bk69

Actually, no country in the world should turn over individuals who are protected by diplomatic immunity.

True, but not really relevant to what I said.

awnlee jawking 🚫

@StarFleet Carl

According to what I've read about this ... technically at the time of the accident, she DID have diplomatic immunity. Her HUSBAND could have been charged, but there was an agreement that family members of people stationed at that base had diplomatic immunity.

My Brit newspapers claimed the opposite - hubby was a serving intelligence officer and had immunity, wifey was no longer entitled to it in her own right. The Brit authorities allowed wifey to flee the country so they could avoid a political altercation and take the hand-wringing 'nothing we can do because the big, bad Americans refuse to extradite her' stance.

AJ

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@awnlee jawking

My Brit newspapers claimed the opposite - hubby was a serving intelligence officer and had immunity, wifey was no longer entitled to it in her own right.

Your Brit newspapers were wrong.

The US had a deal with the UK government that the US staff working at that base and their families were considered members of the US embassy giving all the family members diplomatic immunity.

Why the UK government agreed to this I have no idea.

The agreement was changed subsequent to the accident in question to remove diplomatic immunity from family members.

Replies: REP bk69

REP 🚫
Updated:

@Dominions Son

giving all the family members diplomatic immunity.

True, to a degree.

It is my understanding that Anne Sacoolas was the wife of an intelligence officer based at RAF Croughton.

Members of a diplomatic mission receive varying degrees of immunity from prosecution. An Ambassador has full diplomatic immunity and is immune from prosecution of all criminal and civil matters. An intelligence officer would be a member of the technical staff and would receive full diplomatic immunity for their official duties. They do not receive immunity from prosecution of civil matters that do not relate to their official duties.

The family members of the members of a diplomatic mission receive exactly the same immunity as their sponsors. This is the standard agreement the US enters into for all diplomatic missions. That means Anne Sacoolas was not immune to prosecution of civil matters.

1) Since family members would have had immunity from criminal prosecution, why was a special agreement required for family members living on the base, and what were its provisions?

2) What were the charges the UK wanted to charge her with – criminal or civil?

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@REP

1. Likely, staff of a CIA operation on a foreign military base wouldn't normally be considered part of the US diplomatic mission in that country.

2. As I understand it, criminal. Basically the UK equivalent of vehicular homicide.

Replies: REP

REP 🚫

@Dominions Son

wouldn't normally be considered part of the US diplomatic mission in that country.

Intelligence officers are routinely given positions on US diplomatic missions. This is also true of other countries.

Yes vehicular homicide is a criminal offence, but there can be related civil charges.

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@REP

Intelligence officers are routinely given positions on US diplomatic missions.

Yes, but those intelligence officers are stationed in the embassy.

I rather doubt that's routine for intelligence officers stationed outside the embassy.

Replies: REP

REP 🚫

@Dominions Son

I rather doubt that's routine for intelligence officers stationed outside the embassy.

The special agreement applied to the mission's families living on the base. If he wasn't assigned to the Embassy, then he wasn't part of the mission's staff and didn't have diplomatic immunity, and neither did his wife.

bk69 🚫

@Dominions Son

The US had a deal with the UK government that the US staff working at that base and their families were considered members of the US embassy giving all the family members diplomatic immunity.

Almost correct.

The staff later lost their diplomatic immunity, but the family of the staff didn't have their immunity canceled until earlier this year.

Ernest Bywater 🚫

@joyR

Bear in mind that if your story is contemporary, since the US refused to hand over Anne Sacoolas, who hit and killed a 19 year old with her car then claimed diplomatic immunity,

Veering slightly off topic, it would be interesting to know how things would go if the family of the deceased sued Sacoolas for a few million dollars of lost income and damages in a civil court.

Mushroom 🚫

@REP

I looked at the National Crime Agency (NCA) and it didn't seem right. Based on what I found it seems they only investigate Cyber Crime. What the group is doing is more Cyber Bullying, but that does not appear to be a crime in England.

Because most crimes like this cross state lines, the FBI tends to take the lead in such things. But if it is all within a single jurisdiction, local authorities will normally handle it.

And since this seems to cross multiple nations, it would likely be the FBI on the US side, working with whatever organizations would handle it in the UK (Scotland Yard?).

Replies: REP

REP 🚫

@Mushroom

Thanks. I had already decided on FBI, but not sure of the UK agency(ies).

Replies: Ernest Bywater

Ernest Bywater 🚫

@REP

Thanks. I had already decided on FBI, but not sure of the UK agency(ies).

I know about 40 years ago domestic activities with the potential to embarrass the UK government was often investigated by the Special Branch, part of the Metropolitan Police, and that has since become the Metropolitan Police Anti-Terrorist Branch. Although each Constabulary in the UK has a Special Branch or similar unit within its Criminal Investigation Division, so it would likely be up to the local Constabulary CID unit where these people lived.

However, I wonder if MI5 would handle a matter such as this as they do the UK domestic intelligence work.

bk69 🚫

@REP

Most likely, the lads at State would lean on their diplomatic contacts to 'do something about' the situation.
Now, the problem becomes a serious jurisdiction problem... is jurisdiction determined by the locality of the victim or the 'criminal'?
How 'bulletproof' are the 'criminals'? If they've been annoyances to the government in the past, and a ally is asking that one take matters in hand referring to them, it sounds like something to refer to M.

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@bk69

Most likely, the lads at State would lean on their diplomatic contacts to 'do something about' the situation.

What happens will depend on how much information the FBI was able to discover/determine on the US end.

If the FBI believes that they have identified a specific suspect, it becomes a request for extradition.

What happens from there is governed by the extradition treaties between the US and the UK.

The suspect would have the right to contest extradition in the UK courts, but may choose not to.

In contesting extradition, the suspect can contest the legal sufficiency of the US case, contest jurisdiction of the US over the crime in question, or contest the extradition on a number of other grounds.

joyR 🚫

Apparently we are back to the "respond without comprehending" status quo.

What I said in my post was: (My bold)

Bear in mind that if your story is contemporary, since the US refused to hand over Anne Sacoolas, who hit and killed a 19 year old with her car then claimed diplomatic immunity, it might be that those contacted in the UK because two US kids are being bullied, might not be as motivated as the US might expect...?

I didn't comment on the rights or wrongs of immunity. I did suggest that regardless of those rights or wrongs a lack of motivation was a distinct possibility.

That should not be a surprise to anyone, since it is human nature.

I made that comment because, as I pointed out, it would be relevant if the story was contemporary, it might even allow the author to add a little 'colour' to the story.

Tw0Cr0ws 🚫

Going back to the original question:

Would the US agency involved be the FBI or would the NSA claim jurisdiction? Since it is internet attacks on Americans from within a foreign country they would likely be ones who take it, the FBI is better equipped for acting within the US.

Replies: Ernest Bywater bk69 REP Mushroom

Ernest Bywater 🚫

@Tw0Cr0ws

Would the US agency involved be the FBI or would the NSA claim jurisdiction? Since it is internet attacks on Americans from within a foreign country they would likely be ones who take it, the FBI is better equipped for acting within the US.

From what I've read about both organisations the NSA would intercept the messages as they enter or leave the USA, analyse them, then pass all the information onto the FBI or Department of Justice for action once it's determined action is required.

bk69 🚫

@Tw0Cr0ws

FBI

NSA is more about hacking than mediating flame wars.

Replies: awnlee jawking Dominions Son

awnlee jawking 🚫

@bk69

FBI

Send in Gary Sinise's character to storm into the bullies' homes ;-)

AJ

Replies: Mushroom

Mushroom 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Send in Gary Sinise's character to storm into the bullies' homes ;-)

Now I am laughing as I pictured a long haired hippie looking Lieutenant Dan rolling into the location in a wheelchair.

Dominions Son 🚫

@bk69

NSA is more about hacking than mediating flame wars.

Even in terms of hacking, the NSA would only really be concerned with attacks on the US government, not attempts to hack private individuals.

Replies: bk69

bk69 🚫

@Dominions Son

Government. Or Corporations which are considered important to the government (either major donors, or government contractors).
But yeah, the only individual who anyone worries about protecting from hackers is the Secret Service's problem.

Replies: richardshagrin

richardshagrin 🚫

@bk69

hackers

Not terribly long ago hacking didn't mean computer hacking.

"The term "hack and slash" has its roots in "pen and paper" RPGs such as Dungeons & Dragons, denoting campaigns of violence with no other plot elements or significant goal. The term itself dates at least as far back as 1980, as shown in a Dragon article by Jean Wells and Kim Mohan which includes the following statement: "There is great potential for more than hacking and slashing in D&D or AD&D; there is the possibility of intrigue, mystery and romance involving both sexes, to the benefit of all characters in a campaign."

Online it seems to be computer hacking as the primary meaning, but I did find:
"Hacking (falconry), the practice of raising falcons in captivity then later releasing into the wild
Hacking (rugby), tripping an opposing player
Pleasure riding, horseback riding for purely recreational purposes, also called hacking
Shin-kicking, an English martial art also called hacking."

Calling someone a Hack is also not a compliment, and usually doesn't have much to do with computers. "If you call someone a hack, you mean they're not great at what they do — especially writing. A mediocre writer is called a hack. Once upon a time hack was short for "an ordinary horse," and now it's an insult for writers. No one wants to be a hack!"

Replies: awnlee jawking

awnlee jawking 🚫

@richardshagrin

Shin-kicking, an English martial art also called hacking."

And sometimes, during contests, a game of football breaks out ;-)

AJ

Replies: joyR

joyR 🚫

@awnlee jawking

And sometimes, during contests, a game of football breaks out ;-)

Hmm...

I think you mean;

"And sometimes, during contests, a game of Ice Hockey breaks out."

:)

Replies: bk69

bk69 🚫

@joyR

'Shin kicking' sounds more like soccer, actually. Hockey is closer to boxing.

REP 🚫
Updated:

@Tw0Cr0ws

What government agency(ies) in England would investigate this type of activity if they receive a complaint from the FBI (or other US agency).

My original question was the above. As I previously stated, I decided the FBI would handle making the complaint.

I have since decided on Scotland Yard as the UK agency.

Thanks for the input. My question has been answered.

Replies: Ernest Bywater

Ernest Bywater 🚫

@REP

I have since decided on Scotland Yard as the UK agency.

For it to be within the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Police Criminal Investigation Division base at New Scotland Yard the UK perps would have to be operating from within the Greater London Area. If the perps are operating from Manchester then it would be the Greater Manchester Police who would be handling the investigation. Ditto for the relevant constabulary of where the perps are working from or living.

Mushroom 🚫

@Tw0Cr0ws

Would the US agency involved be the FBI or would the NSA claim jurisdiction?

NSA has no "jurisdiction", as it is a part of the Department of Defense and has absolutely no legal authority to conduct any kind of legal operation. They simply gather intelligence and nothing else.

As far as jurisdiction, that would be split. UK, if the attack originated there, and US if that is where the target is.

Goldfisherman 🚫

Sarcoolas was a registered republican so the both of them were covered by diplomatic immunity. Under this administration criminals are granted governmental criminal immunity

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@Goldfisherman

Sarcoolas was a registered republican so the both of them were covered by diplomatic immunity.

Party affiliation had nothing to do with it. Under the deal the US government had in place with the UK government, which predates the current US administration, they were both covered and the top levels of the UK government have acknowledged this even though certain elements in the UK are still trying to find a way around it.

The Trump admin renegotiated the deal and families of staff at that post are not covered going forward.

Reply to topic

Forum: Author Hangout

I need some help

WARNING! ADULT CONTENT...