Horrid tales of women whose 'steamy' photos, videos ended up online

Sexual assault includes intimidation in a way that is degrading and humiliating to the victim's dignity. [iStockphoto]

For years, Jane thought that one way of expressing her love to her then-boyfriend was by sending him her most private photos and videos.

The man, who was her classmate at the university had pursued her from their first month as medical students and he easily conquered her heart. From then on, they hung out together, took selfies on her mobile phone, and when alone, she shared photos of what she was doing and places she visited as way of keeping their love tight.

In November 2017, he sent a text that led her to what she says was the worst mistake in her life. As she narrates, it all started as a joke... "Do you love me?" he asked and she replied to the affirmative. He followed with another text message asking for truth or dare, and she took the latter.

For a dare, he asked her to send one of her top secret photos of her nakedness. At first, Jane thought the request was weird, then, entertained the doubt of what he was up to but finally gave in thinking she trusted him enough and content their love would bloom into marriage.

As she narrates, she thought he would eventually see what he was asking for the day they would consummate their love after the wedding. After sending the photos, he asked her for a video. She sent it without hesitation.

A year later

However, this was a click of pain, regret, lifetime bullying, and an extortion tool as her photos and video got to the underworld in Telegram.

When the two parted ways, a year later, her now ex-boyfriend sent the nude photos and video to an administrator of the Nairobi Youth Leaks. He even leaked her name and mobile number. She asked him about the betrayal but never got a reply.

Keep Reading

What followed were incessant calls and text messages from unknown men, claiming she was a prostitute. Others demanded as little as Sh500 to remove the content from the group while some wanted to pay her up for sex.

The group has at least 65,828 subscribers and the preview channels have 1.5 million viewers. There are two links, which then mutate into 10 others. Some have at least 120,000 subscribers.

The slogan of the group is 'We are fixing the nation', which is an irony of the pain the victims go through and their destroyed lives.

Initially, a channel called 'Mafisi' was used to circulate photos and videos but was brought down. Jane is today a doctor at a level four hospital. She said that although she chose to save lives, a simple click killed her own. Jane said that to date, she does not pick new numbers that are not saved on her phonebook unless the person on the other end introduces himself or herself through a text. She vows never to date again. At the same time, Jane said, she dreads the moment her parents will know the truth or a friend stumbles onto the videos and photos as she has always lived a pious life.

"It is painful to be betrayed by a person you trust most," she said as her eyes moisten with tears. "I doubt I will ever love again."

Lawyer Okweh Achiando says sharing the photos without the consent of the person who took them is an invasion of privacy and can attract criminal and civil sanctions.

Without consent

"You need to look at the criminal part of it or the civil part of it. The party who claims that their photos were put online without consent should know that this is non consensual pornography and this amounts to revenge. You can report to the police and the man should also be charged for possession of pornographic material," he says.

"There are other circumstances, for example, taking photos of tattoos from your back and years later you find them online, that is consensual pornography. However, this is a breach of privacy. What Jane can do is to make a request to remove it from the website and from the source where that material is kept. This is defamation of character. You can also file a civil suit for the intrusion of privacy and for emotional distress caused."

Jane is not alone. In the course of our investigation, we got other numbers from the Telegram groups. Only a few mustered the courage to tell their ordeal. One told us the issue was too traumatising to talk about before dropping our call.

Another victim who talked to us is Mary. She agreed on the condition that we conceal her identity. She too vowed to never date again after her ex-boyfriend leaked a video that exposes her nudity. The Kakamega-based student said her biggest fear is her parents finding out.

Mary narrates that her love story with the man who has now become her worst nightmare was written in the stars. She was a girl smitten by a promise that she would be gifted the whole world; a beautiful future was the end goal.

Well-guarded

However, the blind love landed her into a digital ditch that she tries to wish away in vain. As her affection for this man grew, so did her trust in him that he would keep well-guarded all her secrets. She had found solace in him.

A moment of sweet nothings over a WhatsApp call saw her expose her breasts to him all in a bid to make him happy and perhaps make him fall deeper in love with her. After all, she was heeding his calls to show affection by showing him part of her.

What she did not know was that the man was recording it and he kept the video safe waiting for the perfect time to pounce. "He was a player," she says of the ex-boyfriend, adding that she sought to end the relationship after finding out that he was dating some other girls within and outside the school. Instead of moving on, the man had other plans to get back at her. She says not long after the break up, he reached out to her telling her that he kept a recording of the video chat the two had.

He started extorting her asking her to pay up or he would leak the video. "He told me to give him Sh25,000 or he would leak it," she says.

The student says she could not raise the amount and she could not report the matter because it would have been embarrassing.

The man sent the video to the admin of a Telegram channel (Random Leaks) together with her phone number. When she found out about the leak, she said she did not know what to do.

"I felt like killing myself," she said. Mary narrates that she received more than 200 messages from strangers, most asking her to send the same photos to their inboxes while others offered her money to have sex with them.

To deal with the intruders, she blocks every new number that sends her a message on WhatsApp, a task that is proving hard to keep up with.

Her biggest headache is how to get the video and her phone number from the Telegram channel, saying that their continued stay traumatises her. Mary says justice for her would be to see the man she once loved pay for the act of making her suffer since October 28. "I do want that video to trend and I would love to see him go to jail," she said. But the laws are silent on the menace. Although the 2010 Constitution guarantees privacy as a right, the Acts of Parliament do not provide a solution to tame revenge porn.

"While several countries have made efforts to criminalise and distinctively address revenge pornography on internet, the Kenyan penal code - Sexual Offences Act of 2006, the Computer Misuse and Cyber-crimes Act 2018, the Kenya Information and Communication Act 2012 all continue to suffer a legislative indistinctness in addressing revenge pornography," Everlyne Wanjiku, a researcher writes in a paper published in October 2022.

She says some of the images are deep fakes or are morphed to show women and girls as victims of rape, pornographic or in a consensual situation.

According to her, it is almost impossible to punish or single out the person who is the source of the photos unless the first sender is a jilted lover or boyfriend.

This menace can be traced back in 2014 when the world woke up to loads of nude photos of celebrities that had been spread by hackers.

In Kenya, former Miss World Kenya 2016 was stripped her title by Ashleys Kenya Limited after a former boyfriend leaked her intimate photos. She took the company to the High Court and won.

In 2018, a video of a deputy governor was spread on WhatsApp platforms. In another incident same year, a middle aged man was charged after threatening to expose nude photos of several female MPs. A year later, a teenage girl committed suicide after her boyfriend threatened to leak her intimate photos.

The government had criminalised posting lewd information online. However, Justice Wilfrida Okwany declared section 84 (b) of the Kenya Information and Communication Act (KICA) to be too vague. According to the judge, the section was crafted broadly such that anyone accused of committing a crime cannot effectively put up a defense.

"The impugned section provides for an offence in such broad terms that the accused cannot answer. That law does not explain who and how it will be determined who will be influenced by the matter," ruled Justice Okwany.

The outlawed section made it a crime to post information relating to lust and sex or encouraging or raising interest in sexual matters to others. The punishment for such posts was attract two years in prison or a fine of Sh200,000 or both. At the center of the matter was blogger Cyprian Nyakundi. He had been charged before Milimani Magistrates Court and in a Kiambu court.

In the Milimani case, he was accused of publishing offensive information about former Interior Security Cabinet Secretary Fred Matiang'i on his Twitter account. He moved to the High Court complaining that the charges against him were unconstitutional as it was his freedom to express himself and criticize leaders.

In reply, the Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecution argued that freedom of expression was limited in a bid to ensure individuals would not abuse telecommunication gadgets and also ensure that individuals do not promote or carry information which is against Kenyan values.

While opposing the case, the State argued that there was a legitimate complaint filed against the controversial blogger and that he had been afforded a fair opportunity to argue his case.

"The section is unconstitutional in so far as it suppresses freedom of expression and denies and accused person right to fair trial through ambiguity. It is vague. The law creating a criminal offence must be clear. The section is retrogressive to an open, modern and democratic society," he ruled.

The outlawed section of the Act was introduced in 2009 following growth of electronic media as a form of communication. However, international criminal laws provide that sexual assault include intimidation in a way that is degrading and humiliating for the victim's dignity.