In online fraud there is a threshold that separates a minor offence from one carrying a prison sentence, and that figure decides whether your case ends in a fine or puts your liberty at risk. Below that line the criminal response is far more limited, and above it the proceeding hardens, with real exposure to prison depending on previous convictions and repeat offending. If you have been summoned as a suspect, or arrested, the first thing worth knowing is which side of that line your case falls on.
First of all, do not make a statement without a lawyer
You have the right to remain silent, and not to speak without a lawyer. In criminal matters the first hours are decisive, and an off-the-cuff statement, made with your nerves on edge and without knowing what is being held against you, can weigh you down like a stone for the rest of the process. We sit down with you, review the case file, and set the strategy before you make any statement, not after.
What is at stake, and what is not
Depending on the offence there may be prison, a fine, a criminal record. But being investigated does not make you guilty, it means you are alleged to have possibly taken part in something that someone will have to prove. And in that word, prove, is where your case is decided.
The defence is fought over the evidence
In cybercrime cases the prosecution rests almost always on digital evidence, logs, IP addresses, devices, accounts. That evidence is not infallible. It is often possible to question how it was obtained, whether the chain of custody was respected, whether it really says what the prosecution claims. There, on that technical side, is where a case that looks solid comes apart. I go into it in why electronic evidence decides cases.
An IP address is not a person
It is one of the prosecution’s favourite shortcuts, “the operation came from your IP, so it was you.” But an IP address identifies a connection, not a particular person. Someone else could have used it, it could have been compromised, it could have been shared. Showing who was really at the keyboard takes a good deal more, and that gap is, more often than not, all the room a defence needs.
Before you explain anything to anyone
If you make a statement before speaking with a lawyer, without having seen what the prosecution actually holds against you -that IP address, those records, those devices-, whatever you say will be fixed on record, and hard to correct later even if the technical evidence eventually falls apart under its own weight. In a case like this the first step is to access the case file and set the strategy before the statement, not after it. Call +34 677 841 007 or get in touch with the firm before that summons; you can also look at our work in cybercrime. When you call, have to hand the summons or police report, the date set for your statement, and any screenshots or documents linked to the accounts, devices or IP addresses the prosecution attributes to you.
Frequently asked questions
I have been summoned as a suspect in a cybercrime. What should I do?
Do not make a statement without a lawyer and do not give explanations on your own. Contact a criminal lawyer before the hearing to learn what is being held against you, review the case file, and prepare your defence. The first decisions are the ones that count most.
Does an IP address prove it was me?
Not on its own. An IP address identifies a connection, not a person, someone else could have used it, it could have been compromised, or it could have been shared. Proving actual authorship takes far more, and that is often the weak point of the prosecution’s case.
Can what is on my phone or computer be used against me?
Only if the evidence was obtained with respect for your rights and the chain of custody. If access to your devices was improper, that evidence can be challenged. It is one of the keys to the defence in cybercrime cases.
Does being under investigation mean I will be convicted?
No. Being under investigation means you are alleged to have possibly taken part in something that the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. With a proper defence, many cases do not end in a conviction.