Went down husband’s phone

I'm sure it violates the Equality act.

No but a solicitor would know the law.

Och, get off your high horse. Even if you are a highly experienced solicitor, you’re not the arbiter of this discussion.

It's distasteful and unprofessional but not illegal.

It's a private message sent to a private individual. I'm presuming the photo is something like a social media image, or maybe a photo taken in a public place.

Wrong. That poster provided zero evidence. It is NOT illegal to 'snoop' on someone's phone any more than it is illegal to read someone's diary. There is absolutely zero legislation that says snooping or reading is a crime. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Now lets end it here.

And the fact that you dare school a lawyer on their own profession is galling! I think they'd know far more than you on this topic.

Especially given that this is in the context of a workplace where he seems to have a senior role. It is gross misconduct.

Please can enlighten us to your qualifications?

I'm a solicitor of over 15 years pqe having had an extended stint in criminal when I was a junior.

What makes you qualified to comment?

You dont know what you're talking about.

I hate that the thread has been derailed by this nonsense. Suggestion that OP is a criminal and should be dealt with as such rather than attention on the grown man exchanging pictures of a 22 year old in a sexual context.

Honest to god, what is wrong with all of you.

A mobile phone is used for making phone calls. Computers (which includes PCs/desktops, laptops and tablets aren't for making phone calls. They are two entirely different things.

What is wrong with you?
To recap:

• @TomPinch asked if "snooping" on other people's mobile phones is a crime
• @MemorableTrenchcoat answered the question that it is illegal to gain unauthorised access to someone else's phone
• No-one, as far as I can see (not even @MemorableTrenchcoat ) has suggested that OP would or should be prosecuted. This would be both disproportionate and not in the public interest - anyone with an ounce of common sense, much less criminal law qualifications and experience, would know this.

Isn’t it clear to you? The highlighted text suggests that there have been times when he HAs tried it on with other women.

The question was what offence applied to checking a person's phone, not "that's the law". They did that. They were not asked to provide an equivalent of Lexis.

YES IT IS. That doesn't mean OP or any other domestic partner (who isn't engaging in coercive control) would be prosecuted under this legislation because it would be disproportionate and not in the public interest to do so.

Isn’t it clear to you? The highlighted text suggests that there have been times when he HAs tried it on with other women.

I know, the sending the photo and commenting on her appearance was wrong in the first place.

What are you talking about?

I know, the sending the photo and commenting on her appearance was wrong in the first place.

You don’t think it’s concerning that he’s sending pics of his hot colleagues in the first place - who does that? I don’t care if he said he wouldn’t cheat (especially as the only reason he gave for not doing so was that he might lose his job.)

Please can enlighten us to your qualifications?

I'm a solicitor of over 15 years pqe having had an extended stint in criminal when I was a junior.

What makes you qualified to comment?

You dont know what you're talking about.

I hate that the thread has been derailed by this nonsense. Suggestion that OP is a criminal and should be dealt with as such rather than attention on the grown man exchanging pictures of a 22 year old in a sexual context.

Honest to god, what is wrong with all of you.

Yes it is. You don't just look up a statute online and say, that's the law. Any first year law student knows that.

What that insufferable poster hasn't done is provide the specific subsection of the statute or any supportive case law.

None of that's wrong though, is it.

Please can enlighten us to your qualifications?

I'm a solicitor of over 15 years pqe having had an extended stint in criminal when I was a junior.

What makes you qualified to comment?

You dont know what you're talking about.

I hate that the thread has been derailed by this nonsense. Suggestion that OP is a criminal and should be dealt with as such rather than attention on the grown man exchanging pictures of a 22 year old in a sexual context.

Honest to god, what is wrong with all of you.

What do you think a computer is? Do you think a mobile phone doesn’t qualify because it isn’t tied to a desk? Does that mean laptops and tablets aren’t computers?

I'm pretty sure sending a photo of a work colleague to a mate, without colleagues consent, carries a few legal issues too. Especially in the context it was sent and the fact that the sender is senior to the colleague. This might be seen as more serious than a quick snoop through a phone!