First Conviction Under New Internet Safety Laws – Dealing With New Offences As a Legal Defence Representative
The recent sentencing of Tyler Webb marks the first successful prosecution under Section 184 of the Online Safety Act 2023 — a landmark moment in UK legal history. Webb, aged 22, was given a total sentence of nine years and four months, partially to be served in a hospital setting, after encouraging a vulnerable woman to self-harm and attempt suicide online.
From the standpoint of a criminal defence solicitor, cases involving new legislation such as this present unique legal and ethical complexities. In particular, the digital nature of the alleged behaviour, the mental health of both parties, and the evolving boundaries of criminal liability online make this an incredibly challenging area of law.
Understanding the New Offence
This case is the first of its kind prosecuted under the newly introduced Online Safety Act. Section 184 specifically targets those who encourage serious self-harm via digital platforms — an area not previously covered with such clarity in UK law.
While encouraging suicide has been illegal under the Suicide Act 1961, encouraging self-harm had not previously been categorically criminalised. The inclusion of self-harm in the new law recognises the serious dangers of online abuse — but also introduces grey areas regarding interpretation, intention, and mental health capacity on both sides of a case.
The Role of Intention and Mental Health
In order to prosecute, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) needed to prove not only that Webb made statements likely to cause harm, but also that he intended to encourage that behaviour — or believed his actions were capable of doing so. This requirement for proving intent creates a difficult threshold, particularly when both parties are vulnerable.
As defence lawyers, we must raise questions such as: was the accused aware of the potential consequences of their statements? Were they mentally well enough to understand the impact of their actions? Was this a case of exploitation, mutual vulnerability, or something in between?
In Webb’s case, it was acknowledged that he had mental health difficulties himself, leading the court to impose a hybrid hospital order. This means part of his sentence will be served in a secure hospital environment, with a transfer to prison once treatment is deemed complete.
The Digital Evidence Dilemma
Another complexity in modern prosecutions is the sheer volume and sensitivity of digital evidence. From audio recordings to graphic drawings, video calls, and online messages — the digital trail can seem overwhelming. However, for defence lawyers, each item must be examined for context, intent, and admissibility. Misinterpretations or lack of clarity in tone, humour, or fantasy versus reality can all lead to potentially devastating legal consequences.
Balancing Justice With Legal Safeguards
There is no doubt this case is disturbing and tragic. The complainant showed great courage in reporting what happened, and their safety and recovery are of paramount importance. But the justice system must also ensure the accused’s rights are upheld, especially when mental health concerns are present.
The Online Safety Act is a much-needed response to growing digital harms, but as with any new legislation, its application will take time to mature. As criminal defence solicitors, our duty is to hold the system accountable — ensuring laws are applied fairly, proportionately, and with full regard for human complexity on both sides of the courtroom.
This landmark case is likely to set a precedent for how courts handle online harm moving forward — and highlights just how essential expert legal representation is in such novel and emotionally charged prosecutions.
How We Can Help
If you have any questions or concerns regarding charges relating to new internet safety laws, then our team of experts are on-hand to answer your questions. Call us 0161 477 1121 or Message Us to speak to one of our team.
