The new crime of transmitting sexually explicit Deepfakes – 5 key points you should know

1.         What is the new offence?

The new Commonwealth offence of ‘Using a carriage service to transmit sexual material without consent’ under section 474.17A Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), has commenced on 3 September 2024.  

It includes targeting the sharing of non-consensual deepfake sexually explicit material. 

2.         What must the prosecution prove?  

An offence is committed if:

1.         The first person uses a carriage service to transmit material of another person; and

2.         the other person is, or appears to be, 18 years of age or older; and

3.         the material depicts, or appears to depict:

a.         the other person engaging in a sexual pose or sexual activity (whether or not in the presence of other persons); or

b.         a sexual organ or the anal region of the other person; or

c.         if the other person is female—the other person’s breasts; and

4.         the first person:

a.         knows that the other person does not consent to the transmission of the material; or

b.         is reckless as to whether the other person consents to the transmission of the material. 

3.         How does the offence apply to Deepfakes? 

The offence provides that it is irrelevant whether the material transmitted is in an unaltered form, or has been or altered in any way, using technology.

This is noted to include images, videos or audio depicting a person that have been edited or entirely created using digital technology (including artificial intelligence), generating a realistic but false depiction of the person.

4.         What is the penalty                

The maximum penalty is 6 years. 

The penalty increases to 7 years in certain situations, including if the person also created or altered the material.  

5.         What are the exclusions?

It is not an offence if: 

a.         transmitting the material is necessary for, or of assistance in:

i. enforcing a law of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory; or

ii. monitoring compliance with, or investigating a contravention of, a law of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory; or

b.         transmitting the material is for the purposes of proceedings in a court or tribunal; or

c.         transmitting the material is for a genuine medical or scientific purpose; or

d.         a reasonable person would consider transmitting the material to be acceptable, having regard to the following:

i. the nature and content of the material;

ii. the circumstances in which the material was transmitted;

iii. the age, intellectual capacity, vulnerability or other relevant circumstances of the person depicted, or appearing to be depicted, in the material;

iv. the degree to which the transmission of the material affects the privacy of the person depicted, or appearing to be depicted, in the material;

v. the relationship between the person transmitting the material and the person depicted, or appearing to be depicted, in the material;

vi. any other relevant matters. 

Our Brisbane criminal lawyers have significant experience in computer crimes. If you are under investigation or facing charges related to deepfake content, early advice is crucial. Contact our experienced criminal lawyers today for a confidential discussion about your case.

What is ‘Upskirting’?

In Queensland, it is an offence to observe or visually record the private (genital or anal) region of another in circumstances where they would expect to be afforded privacy. An example is using a mobile phone in a public place to take photos of women’s underwear under their skirt without consent.

Clients usually come to us extremely embarrassed, and there is often some media attention particularly if it arises in well-known shopping centres. As such, this type of charge requires extra sensitivity and reputational considerations.

In addition to the practical considerations, legal issues we look at include whether the prosecution can prove the element of ‘without consent’ beyond a reasonable doubt, as often the female in the photo or video may not be identifiable, nor might there be a statement from them.

Alternatively, there may be a complainant, but then a question arises as to what the photo or video actually depicts. This is because the definition to prove the charge is very specific. Often, the image may be blurry, not actually depict the region as defined, or the female may be wearing bike shorts, in which case it is not an offence.

Therefore, there is usually some scope for negotiations.

Bringing down the number of photos or videos is extremely important on any plea. This could mean the difference between penalties of a fine or imprisonment, or a conviction being recorded or not.

A methodical approach is key to a successful defence for a client. Contact our experienced Brisbane criminal lawyers for a no-obligation, confidential discussion.

What is ‘invisible theft detection powder’ and how is it used by the police in drug offences?

At times, the Australian Federal Police may undertake controlled operations to investigate organised crime syndicates, such as in cases of drug importation.

One technique includes intercepting packages of illicit drugs. The item is then substituted with an inert substance to resemble the original. During reconstruction, light sensitive powder (‘phosphorescent powder’) is applied to the item.

The idea is when the recipient touches the item, the invisible powder sticks to their hands and upon arrest, police can apply a UV light to prove circumstantially that the person has touched it.

There are flaws with this. Generally, the powder is very fine and extremely transferable. The powder sticks to almost anything, as it is meant to do. Also, a variety of household substances may also react to UV light, such as detergent, toothpaste, tonic water, human fluids, vaseline, and olive oil.

Our experienced criminal defence lawyers have won cases based on arguing against this type of evidence.  Call our Brisbane criminal lawyers to discuss your case further. We act in all courts in Queensland.

Bomb threats on a plane

Bomb threats are taken extremely seriously by the courts, especially when it is said on a plane.

Our Brisbane criminal lawyers have represented clients charged with the serious offence of ‘Threats and False Statements’ under the Crimes (Aviation) Act, being to threaten to destroy, damage, or endanger the safety of an aircraft, or kill or injure anyone on board. The maximum penalty is 10 years.

Often, clients make such threats whilst intoxicated. They usually have no criminal history or very minor history and show a great deal of remorse after they are sober and realise the severity of what they have said. And like most criminal cases, there are usually significant personal circumstances which have led a client to this point. 

If the charge is proven, a term of imprisonment can follow. Prospects can be improved by negotiating facts, preparing supporting material, and using our access to legal databases to research comparable cases in arguing for a lower sentence. This is the basis of the most effective submissions for a better outcome.

Contact us to speak to our experienced criminal lawyers in aviation crimes about your case.