Abstract
Some cybercrimes are relatively easy to prosecute, while others are almost impossible. This often depends on the perpetrator’s modus operandi. When it comes to hate speech or other prohibited content posted on social networking sites, the effectiveness of basic investigative activities relying on data provided by the site administrator is limited. This article presents the results of a qualitative analysis of selected cases of legally concluded criminal proceedings concerning crossing the limits of freedom of expression on the Internet, where prosecution was successful and the real perpetrator was identified and brought to justice. In the analyzed cases, all perpetrators who posted on websites run by Polish entities were identified effectively, due to the cooperation between law enforcement authorities, website administrators, and telecommunications entities. On the other hand, the perpetrators of hate speech on foreign social networking sites (e.g. Facebook) were identified with basic Open-Source Intelligence techniques analysis, based on data publicly available in the perpetrators’ profiles (such as names and surnames, workplaces, and details of family and friends). This article provides descriptions of the facts and the course of proceedings in the analyzed cases, illustrating various variants of how the identity of the perpetrator through the analysis of publicly available data may be established. Key words: social media, hate speech, cybercrime, OSINT
Publisher
Krajowa Szkola Sadownictwa i Prokuratury
Subject
General Medicine,General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science,General Medicine,Ocean Engineering,General Medicine,General Medicine,General Medicine,General Medicine,General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science,General Medicine
Reference37 articles.
1. Aichner T. i in., Twenty-Five Years of social media: A Review of Social Media Applications and Definitions from 1994 to 2019, „Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking” 2021, vol. 24, no. 4.
2. Anwar T., Unfolding the Past, Proving the Present: Social Media Evidence in Terrorism Finance Court Cases, „International Political Sociology” 2020, vol. 14, no. 4.
3. Błaszczyk M., Odpowiedzialność za przestępstwa „mowy nienawiści” stypizowane w art. 256 § 1 i 257 k.k. – wybrane problemy normatywne i praktyczne, „Studia Iuridica” 2021, nr 88. Chabiera A., Klotz M., Dowody z mediów społecznościowych w sprawach dotyczących przestępstw z nienawiści ‒ praktyka polskich organów ścigania, [w:] Media społecznościowe w postępowaniu karnym, red. P. Waszkiewicz, Warszawa 2022.
4. Chlebowicz P., Filipkowski W., Analiza kryminalna: aspekty kryminalistyczne i prawnodowodowe, Warszawa 2011.
5. Creswell J.W., Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, Thousand Oaks 2014.