Blackmail

Blackmail contrary to section 23 of the Theft Ordinance (Cap. 210) may be committed when cyberbullies, with a view to gaining something for themselves or others, or with intent to cause loss to others use information and technology systems to make unwarranted demands with menaces. Demands with menaces are unwarranted, unless persons making them do so in the belief that they have reasonable grounds for making the demands and that the use of menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demands. Blackmail is punishable on conviction upon indictment by imprisonment for 10 years.

Blackmail is committed by cyberbullies who, for example, have had video recorded sexual intercourse with the victim, whom they then send messages through information and technology systems demanding more intercourse or money to refrain from putting the video into circulation. An example of this situation, though involving adults, is HKSAR v Chai Mei Kwan, which resulted in 20 months’ imprisonment with the defendant’s plea of guilty. After having sexual intercourse with the victim, the defendant sent him SMS messages demanding money. In another SMS, she told him there was a video of their intimacies, which could be distributed to “everyone”. In sentencing Deputy District Judge Joseph To remarked “There are two aggravating factors in this case. Firstly, the defendant did not just utter empty words; she had equipped herself with the video clip showing her and the victim in compromising circumstances. Secondly, the threatened means of dissemination via the computer must have filled the victim with alarm; it is common knowledge that the Internet knows no borders and once uploaded information is difficult to erase.”