Defence Lawyers for Allegations Based on Chats, Images and Online Communication

By Dr. Julius Hagen, Attorney-at-Law

Defence in sexual-offence allegations based on digital communication

In these cases, much often depends on what digital material actually exists and how it is later read. A single screenshot or isolated file can shape the allegation early on even though the legally relevant context is still far from clear.

Typical constellations in practice

Dating-app chats or messenger exchanges: The key question is often whether the full exchange is available or only an extract that reads very differently without its surrounding context.

Sent or stored images and files: The allegation may concern the act of sending, the act of possessing, or the interpretation of the content itself — these are legally distinct questions with different consequences.

Forwarded screenshots: Material presented via screenshot by a third party frequently raises unresolved questions of attribution and completeness that can alter the picture significantly.

Communication arising after a personal conflict: Where messages only become the basis of an allegation after a dispute, a separation, or a professional conflict, the background to the allegation itself becomes a central element of the defence.

Why screenshots and files rarely speak for themselves

Many cases rely on individual screenshots, image files or chat extracts. That is often not enough for a reliable legal assessment. What matters may be what came before and after, whether material was cropped, forwarded or taken from a longer exchange, and whether a particular item can really be attributed to a specific person.

The fact that something appears on a device or in a screenshot does not by itself answer what legal significance should be attached to it.

Why digital material does not automatically support one accusation

Not every message, image or file leads to the same kind of allegation. It can make a legal difference whether the issue concerns communication content, a disputed exchange, stored files or forwarded material. The focus here is not on exhaustive analysis of every possible offence, but on how digital material becomes incriminating in the first place.

Why rushed explanations often create problems

Many suspects want to explain immediately what a chat meant or why an image was on a device. That reaction is understandable, but risky. Anyone who responds without file knowledge and without a clear view of the actual digital record fixes a position too early.

Those explanations may later be used against the defence alongside screenshots, file findings or platform data. In digital cases especially, much depends on whether any statement actually fits the file.

How we approach these cases

Our work begins with the basic questions: what has actually been secured or alleged, whether the authorities have the full communication or only an extract, whether attribution is clear or merely assumed, and whether the content supports a legally sustainable allegation or only creates an initial impression.

From there, the case can be assessed on the basis of the actual digital record, its real context and what it legally supports — rather than on the basis of an initial incriminating impression.