Son hacked into the school system- should he accept a caution?

[Animavillis]

Hi, I'm desperately looking for some advise about my son's situation. He hacked into the school computer system and changed a desktop picture. In return, the school reported him to the police. After 3 months, the police decided to give him a conditional caution. Both the police, YOT and the firm which provided a duty solicitor during the police interview are nagging me to sign it. I am hesitant though because this will be on my son's record forever and he didn't do any damage to the school. His intention was to let them know that the system was insecure and easily accessible. What is going to happen if he doesn't sign it?

but what did he change the picture to?

( that is what my osn wants to know)

PLEASE god its something brilliant

Is it likely the CPS would prosecute

Impossible to be certain but from their point of view this is a nailed on win. Unlike a fight there is no argument about who started it, who did what to whom and so on. It is very straightforward. It is up to the courts to set the penalty to reflect the seriousness of the offence (or lack thereof).

Plus would the school want the terrible publicity of prosecuting

If they don't they shouldn't have referred it to the police. It is now out of their hands. And as for the head being a laughing stock, I hope not. Whilst it seems not much damage was done the fact remains that a criminal offence was committed.

This happened at DS2s school. He did it because he could. Stupid and thoughtless but no malicious intent.
The boy was read the riot act and suspended for a week. No police.
It seems unfair that a school would rarely call the police for violent stuff and yet do this to your son OP.

I think the school should have just dealt with it.

They should also review their security.

I would definitely not accept a caution without seeking proper legal advice!

What do you expect legal advice would tell you? If he doesn't accept a caution he is gambling that the CPS will decide not to prosecute. There are no other options. A caution is much better than the alternative.

Of course, he has already had proper legal advice from the duty solicitor who is telling him that his best option in this situation is to accept the caution.

You might want to find out what was actually meant by 'hacking' in this case. A mild breach (modifying one instance of a desktop image) of the terms of use of the school's computer network, to which he has legitimate access, is not the same as gaining unauthorised access to another system and causing damage. It may not even constitute a crime and you might be well advised to ask what actual law he has supposedly broken in order to 'earn' the caution.

There are a number of interests possibly contrary to those of your DS here. Firstly, whoever runs the school network will not want to look incompetent. Secondly, the police are also incentivised to make sure that as many 'crimes' as possible that are reported to them are closed with some kind of 'victory'. Both may well be trying to close this trivial case in a way that makes them look good without any regard to what actually happened.

Hacking is used in very emotive terms as a 'scare crime'. It can just be educational exploration or improvement of a system. (See for instance Steven Levy's bestseller 'Hackers, heroes of the computer revolution'.)

What do you expect legal advice would tell you? If he doesn't accept a caution he is gambling that the CPS will decide not to prosecute. There are no other options. A caution is much better than the alternative

I dont like duty solicitors. In my experience they are not unbiased and they are often not fully qualified. My neighbour was one such. She was actually a legal executive and before that a secretary in a legal firm. She had next to no qualifications in law.

So, what would I expect from legal advice from a criminal lawyer? I would want to know not just the options - I know those but rather how far reaching accepting a caution might be. If he went to court and pleaded not guilty - does he have any defence? Might the couyrt let him go? What are the statistics on getting off and are the consequences much worse than a caution?

It might even be that being convicted is no bigger issue than the caution frankly. I would want to know the consequencies of both LONG TERM and in more than just one way.

I know it is more than just a ticking off and that it will last a lifetime and could affect lots of things. When a child is so young, its a lifetime of regret not just a few years. It may impact on career - and you should know this now, not when someone cruelly tells you later. Even leaving the country may be affected - and you need to understand that.

I suspect that this has gone to far and the time to deal with it was at interview or when the school was deciding what to do - and now a young life is probably ruined..... and for what?

But knowing what the damage is is half the battle in deciding the way forward.

I once worked in a really "hard" school. There were career criminals
(even at 14) in there. In one case, that did get reported to the police, three relatively innocent kids took cautions or were sent to magistrates court, pleaded guilty and ended up with records. One old lag of a lad

(dad in prison, uncle in for life). the ring leader opted for court and for jury. He got off. The other kids have not done well. He is still ducking and diving - and getting away.

Now I am not saying that will happen here. But just get proper advice.

That said, I would make sure if my DC were in court the school got optimum publicity for this . After all, as someone else said, they dont send for the police for assult and many violent crimes, so why in this case? They deserve disrepute.

I always thought that it was the person pressing the charges ( ie the school) who could get them dropped and if the school said they didnt want to persue it, the police could do nothing - clearly I am wrong.

( I only thought the above because someone once asked me not to press charges against them so that they didnt have to be prosecuted. Different situation though, it was an assult)

fwiw, I think exclusion ( permanent) in this instance would have been a better option for the school and for the boy. Its more usual. I am guessing this DC is " the one" who the school will be making an expaly of because they decided on a zero tolerance approach after having too many problems earlier. But that hardly seems a fair way forward.

Are you saying that a court allows a legal secretary to stand up in court and defend someone. I think you might be confusing a duty for someone who gives thirty mins grr advice at a solicitors

I am saying DrNick,that my neighbour, a legal executive, is the person who the police call when someone askes for the "duty solcitor" when at the police station.

She is there at the interview and gives the "advice" ( often a caution) . She is not unbiased and doesnt always know what is best ( just what is easiest).

IF ( not often ) it gets to court, someone else gets called in - a proper solicitor and barrister if needed. Not her. But by then it may well be too late. Hence I say, you need a proper person to give advice, someone working in your interests. That doesnt always happen, especially if people are naive about the law.

Both the police, YOT and the firm which provided a duty solicitor during the police interview are nagging me to sign it

I am taking my view on what might be the case from this (above) in the OP.

My son was advised to plead guilty by a duty solicitor for something. He decided not too and it never got to court.

He was offered a caution glad he didn't take it as he now has a clean record. I think duty solicitors are not always the best. Another opinion won't hurt.

just because something is weak you should not take advantage of it, even i it is only to prove how vulnerable it is.

It is a very unpleasant attitude

I would be looking to accept the caution and ramming home the message that is coming with it.

not trying to see how my child could best get away with it

'Duty solicitors' are, quite often, not solicitors. They are legal executives who have been on a course and have been accredited. There was a gent on my law degree who was police station accredited, meaning he could give advice in the police station, but he'd only just started his LLB so wasn't a qualified solicitor (nor did he have a degree in law).

I really do think you need to find out exactly what he's done and then go and see a qualified solicitor for some legal advice. Don't be too hasty in accepting a caution, it may not be the best route for him if it's something as mundane as changing a screen saver via an unsecure control panel.

What an overreaction. The child changed a setting and in my opinon it does not consitute criminal damage. Its not as if he printed off and distributed another child's IEP or deleted child protection information.

I think the IT manager was shown up to be an imcompetant and he got revenge by informing the police. The school should have locked down desktop settings with group policy. If they are stupid enough to give a pupil the rights to change the screen wall paper then what do the school expect.

I think you should get advice from a proper solititor who specialises in network security law and not take the caution. Changing a screen saver or wall paper because your school has given you the right to do so is hardly hacking the pentagon.

How old is your son? Is ignorance of the law a defense if a child has commited a crime on the basis that a child has dimmished responsiblity (on the basis of immaturity) for what is supposely a very sophisicated crime. Is it reasonable to expect a child to appreciated that changing a screen saver setting is actually crime. (Its not like if he has commited murder where it blatently obvious that a crime has been commited.)

The only thing to do is get specialised advice from the best solititor that money can buy.

You really must pay for him to see a very experienced solicitor in this area even if just for an hour of their time. Do not accept the caution. There may be all kinds of defences that can be used. As said above duty solicitors are whoever they can drum up who is prepared to work nights. They will not be Computer Misuse Act 1990 specialists.

How old is your child?
What exactly did he do? How did he get into the system? Was in from home or school? There is a big difference between accessing the control panel from a school computer and infiltrating the network from an external computer and bypassing levels of passwords.

No system is entirely fool prof though. Just because he could get in he knows he shouldn't have. He may well have broken the law as detailed below and has therefore should accept some consequences.

Liken it to a break of trust and accessing a school building or office maybe? No building is entirely break-in proof. If a pupil decides to test the security by breaking in to the office and changing the photo on the desk - just to show the HT that his security is accessible - well it's still a crime and still punishable. Surely this is similar?

Fwiw secondary schools do get the police involved for physical assaults and other crimes. Often though it has to come from the victim. Not all families decide to prosecute. In this case the victim of the crime is school so they get to decide.

I would advise going to a solicitors and getting formal advice. But I certainly wouldn't be congratulating my child and telling him his ict skills are good. He committed an office and as a parent I'd be coming down ninnies with a to. Of bricks and making him realise he is not above the law and that his stupidity may have far reaching consequences and that he has no one to blame but himself.

If he had done it in a workplace - even at the same age, on work
Experience it a Saturday job for example - then he'd be looking at a disciplinary and legal action. School is no different.

Go to a qualified solicitor for some unbiased advice and make your son pay for it.

what picture did he change?

Also search out the home school IT agreement you and he will have signed. Pretty much every secondary school has one or should have one.

bit hardly a legal doc