The nature of relationships and consent has significantly changed due to the popularity of online dating platforms. As these interactions continue to increase in virtual space, examining the role of digital evidence in the legal matters surrounding online dating becomes essential. This article explores the crucial role of digital evidence in establishing consent in sexual harassment cases. By analysing real-life cases and examining the intricacies of conversations on dating apps, we explore how technology can simplify or complicate the question of consent.

Decoding Conversations for Contextual Clarity

A contextual understanding of dating apps includes both parties’ engagements on a platform. This includes their conversations, demarcation of boundaries, desires, and agreements in specific discussions. This offers insights into the user’s relationship and mutual interaction expectations. While discussing consent, it is pertinent to consider the setting where the communication initially occurred. For example, consider a series of messages that tell a story of stimulating meetings incidental to the crime. This bucks the theory that the follow-up happened per a consensual scenario. Concrete talking about likes, dislikes, and clean-cut boundaries can imply direct expression of the parties.

Besides this, the context can also help us understand how the relationship between the two individuals evolved. The early conversations may be less open and casual. However, the latest ones may imply an intimate relationship. Additionally, the situation conveyed by interactions can aid in determining whether there was any occurrence of non-consent. It can also help in understanding if the actions were in a pattern of consensual behaviour. This is essentially, specifically in the legal assessment of rape cases. Overall, one must understand that the contextual comprehensive derived through dating app conversations goes beyond one-sided remarks and constitutes a deep understanding of consent dynamics among the parties. This evidence will also explain what one user has urged the other to do.

Syncing the Story: Corroborating Interaction Timelines

Digital timestamps allow accurate tracing of what happened and when it happened. They establish the sequence of events and the parties’ consent to their actions. This data plays a pivotal role in creating a chronological explanation of the meetings, consent, and sexual encounters. The investigators can read and scrutinise every message on the dating app. Every message, followed by the parties’ actions, can provide evidence. For instance, a person claims they have mutually consented just before the very beginning of the meeting. Here, the corresponding messages can be analysed to determine whether that was the case.

An essential element of evidence collection is building an accurate and precise sequence of events. Understanding the series of events is the basis for analysing consent as the main factor. In this manner, investigators can detect whether, at some point, one partner was saying something and suddenly changed their mind. Or the other partner misread it. If the message contents depict smooth communication, this implies mutual agreement. In contrast, parameters such as time gaps or sudden changes in the conversation’s topic can indicate the other partner’s discomfort. This clarification is necessary for the court since it allows us to bring both verifying and challenging visual evidence.

Truth and Tangles: Unveiling Contradictions and Confirmations

Evidence can prove or disprove any statements by two people involved in a case. For example, consider a situation where one party says on record that they never intended to meet, but their chats show otherwise. This can have a very significant impact on the outcomes of the case. Examining contradictions and confirmation in a conversation is a process that scrutinises the conversations to verify or reject the parties’ statements. This shifts the scales of the burden in proving consent.

For example, one party is not very eager to participate in a specific sexual encounter. However, the message content is very positive, and they are the one to start the activity. Pointing out such contradictions helps understand a party’s claim and spot possible discrepancies. Conversely, confirmations occur when the chat message harmonises with a party’s claims. Such confirmations further enhance the credibility of that individual’s testimony and, thus, support their case. Evidence from dating app messages can also support what the witness or other evidence implies. Sometimes, a person consents to perform a specific action but later feels uncomfortable and disagrees. In such situations, the consent pattern, along with confirmations and contradictions in the chat, can play a crucial role in understanding the actual chain of events.

Proving Consent: Case Studies

Case Study 1

In this case, the trial court convicted the appellant under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The court imposed a sentence of ten years with a fine of ₹6 lakhs. He challenged his conviction before the High Court of Delhi (Criminal Appeal 416/2022, 2022:DHC:4194). He claimed that the trial court erred in finding that he took the victim’s consent to sexual intercourse using a false promise of marriage. He submitted a blog post written by the victim where she stated she did not believe in the concept of marriage. In this appeal, he contended that the trial court did not consider this blog post and subsequent sharing on her social media platforms.

He further said he met the woman on Tinder, a platform “popular for casual dating.” This clearly shows that she had no doubts about the promise of marriage. The High Court concluded that the woman’s blogs and social media posts express her reservations about the concept of marriage and her support for live-in relationships. Thereafter, the court allowed the accused to be released on bail.

Case Study 2

The complainant and the accused met through an online dating application called Hinge. The complainant claimed that the accused obtained her consent by promising to marry her. He claimed to have an engineering degree from IIT Kharagpur, a dual master’s from the United Kingdom and New Zealand, and a PhD from Kings College London. However, he later turned out to be a mere graduate.

At the time of the general investigation, the complainant stated she had found out about his lying about his educational qualifications. However, she still stayed with him at an Airbnb property for four days and also had consensual sexual encounters. Regarding the clear images and videos recorded from the accused’s mobile phone, the accused admitted during the interrogation that he recorded them with the complainant’s consent. The court held that their sexual encounters were prima facie consensual. There is no evidence of any false promise or misrepresentation of fact. Considering the allegations and circumstances, the court granted bail to the accused (Bail Application 2188/2023, 2024:DHC:4).

Takeaways

In both cases, the complainants appear to have given their consent willingly. However, the question arose of whether the accused had done any manipulation to get her consent. In such a situation, sexual intercourse with a false promise of marriage amounts to rape. As we have seen in these cases, the complainants consented even after being aware of the information that the accused persons tried to deviate. In the first case, the complainant did not favour marrying, as implied by her blog posts and social media.

In the second case, the court noted that Hinge is not a matrimonial app, and the accused never promised to marry her. The complainant went on to stay with him even after knowing that his educational qualifications were fraudulent. These judgements show how consent is proved in a court of law and manipulations are set aside. The courts’ decisions affirm that consent remains valid when given with full knowledge despite any preceding misrepresentations.

Conclusion

Digital evidence is crucial for understanding consent in online dating. Case studies demonstrate how conversations, timelines, and interactions on dating platforms can clarify or complicate legal proceedings. This scrutiny helps determine the true nature of consent, supporting or challenging claims with concrete digital footprints. As technology continues to shape personal relationships, it is essential to recognise the importance of digital evidence in legal contexts. This knowledge aids in developing more responsible online interactions and enhances the legal system’s ability to address issues of consent accurately and fairly. However, although we understand that dating apps play a significant role in providing evidence, can we ensure their reliability and integrity?