Practice question
A technician lawfully holds ordinary diagnostic tools and has no proved intent to commit a covered cybercrime. The prosecution invokes possession under Section4(a)(5)(ii) merely because tools can be misused. Which missing requirement matters?
- The specified intent to use the covered item to commit an offense under the section
- Any tool ownership automatically suffices
- Lawful use proves criminal intent
- Every diagnostic program is forbidden
- A tool’s price replaces the mental element
Legal references
- RA10175 ChapterII Sections4(a)(4)–(5),4(b)(2)–(3) and5: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2012/ra_10175_2012.html
- Disini v Secretary of Justice GR203335 February11,2014 MAIN operative declaration: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/feb2014/gr_203335_2014.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.