Criminal Lawyers in Fake Social Media Profiles Defense
Advanced technical defense by criminal lawyers specialized in fake profiles and digital identity theft crimes
Creating a fake profile using another person's real name and photos, run persistently and with an appearance of authenticity, amounts to usurping civil status (Article 401 of the Spanish Criminal Code (CP)), with imprisonment of 6 months to 3 years; if the victim's private data is also disclosed, the offence of discovery and disclosure of secrets (Article 197 CP) is added, carrying 1 to 4 years, up to 5 if it affects privacy or a minor. Clearly identified parody accounts are not an offence if they do not create genuine confusion. Our defence challenges the attribution of the IP address where the network was shared, and, for the victim, we handle the judicial identification of the perpetrator and the removal of the content.
You have been reported over a fake profile: what happens now and what is alleged
Creating a fake profile is not in itself a named offence: what is prosecuted is the use made of it. Where another person's civil status is usurped —acting as them in legal traffic, not merely using their name or photo— Art. 401 CP applies, with six months to three years in prison. Where the profile is used to obtain money by deception, the classification is fraud (Arts. 248 and 249 CP). Where images or personal data are circulated, the focus shifts to privacy offences, and where criminal conduct or dignity-harming statements are attributed, to offences against honour. The investigation almost always starts with identifying the IP address and the device, and that is where attribution is decided.
What to do (and what not to do) before making a statement
- Do not make a statement without a lawyer or admit ownership of the profile. Arts. 118 and 520 LECrim protect silence and a prior confidential meeting with your lawyer. Attributing an account to a specific person is exactly what the prosecution must prove, and an early admission saves it that work.
- Do not delete the account or change the passwords. Deletion is read as concealment and, moreover, destroys the access logs that often show the account was operated from another device or a shared network.
- Document who else had access to your network or device. An IP address does not identify a person, only a connection. The line contract, who lived there, an open wifi network or shared computers are the basis for disputing attribution.
- Ask the platforms to preserve the logs. Connection data is retained for limited periods. The preservation request goes through the court, and the sooner it is filed, the more likely the exculpatory log still exists.
- Do not contact the complainant or reply from another account. Any later message is added to the case file and reinforces the very attribution being disputed. If the profile is still active, tell your lawyer so that the court is the one to order its removal.
Fake Profiles and Digital Impersonation: Concept, Types and Penalties (Arts. 197, 401 CP)
The creation and management of fake social media profiles with real data of third parties is a contemporary manifestation of identity theft subsumed criminally in various types according to circumstances: civil status usurpation of Art. 401 CP when persistence and integrity of impersonation concur; discovery and disclosure of secrets of Art. 197 CP when personal data are unlawfully accessed or private data of the victim are disseminated; and, frequently, in concurrence with fraud (Art. 248 CP) when economic benefits are obtained through deceit based on the usurped identity, or harassment or stalking (Art. 172 ter CP) when the fake profile is used to harass or intimidate. The protected legal interest is triple: the personal identity of the impersonated victim, the privacy and own image guaranteed by Art. 18 of the Constitution, and, mediately, the security of digital traffic. Consolidated Supreme Court case-law has developed specific criteria for digital impersonation.
Forms of Digital Impersonation
The methods of commission in digital impersonation are extraordinarily diverse. Complete impersonation consists of creating a profile that appears to be the victim's using their name, photographs, real biographical data, contact list and recognisable identification elements, managed persistently with appearance of authenticity. Catfishing employs real or synthetic identities to engage in romantic, emotional or economic relations with victims; when the identity of a specific real person is used, it integrates usurpation; when synthetic identities are used, it usually integrates fraud if it obtains economic transfers. Instrumental profiles for cyberbullying or harassment serve to harass the victim under the appearance of a third party. Deepfakes of image, video or voice use generative AI technology to create false content attributable to the victim, integrating possible offences against own image, privacy and, in non-consensual sexual content cases, sexual offences or against moral integrity. Parody or satire accounts clearly identified as such do not integrate usurpation if they do not produce reasonable confusion.
Penalties by Classification
The penalties vary by qualification. Civil status usurpation of Art. 401 CP carries 6 months to 3 years prison. Discovery of secrets of Art. 197 CP carries 1 to 4 years prison and 12 to 24 months' fine, aggravated up to 5 years when disseminated data affect privacy or when the passive subject is minor or vulnerable person. The concurrent fraud adds 6 months to 3 years prison (basic) or 1 to 6 years (aggravated by amount over €50,000). Harassment or stalking of Art. 172 ter CP carries 3 months to 2 years prison, aggravated in gender or domestic violence. The concurrence of various types in real or instrumental concurrence may multiply penalties. Civil liability ex delicto includes compensation for moral, reputational damage, management costs for content removal and identity restoration. Precautionary measures of account blocking and content removal are usual in criminal proceedings.
Defence and Prosecution
The technical defense and prosecution of fake profiles are built on four consolidated axes. For the defence of the accused: first, proof of the clearly identifiable satirical or parodic character, excluding impersonation intent; second, challenge of material authorship through computer expert evidence questioning IP attribution (shared WiFi networks, hacked accesses, abandoned devices); third, absence of persistence or integrity in cases of sporadic creation without continuous management. For the victim's prosecution: first, urgent evidence preservation through notarially certified screenshots, timestamping, preservation of URLs and metadata before content deletion; second, judicial request for identification to platforms (Meta, X, TikTok, Google) through judicial order to obtain the IP of profile creation and use, with linkage to a physical connection line via international cooperation where appropriate; third, urgent precautionary measures of content removal under EU DSA Regulation 2022/2065 and, where appropriate, criminal complaint for usurpation, discovery of secrets or concurrent offences; fourth, integral civil claim for moral and patrimonial damages against the identified author.
Current Forensic Practice
In current forensic practice, fake profile and digital impersonation proceedings are one of the fastest-growing segments of Technological Criminal Law. Organic Law 1/2025 on Justice Service Efficiency, EU Regulation 2022/2065 on Digital Services (DSA) with reinforced obligations for large platforms, Organic Law 3/2018 on Personal Data Protection, Organic Law 10/2022 on comprehensive guarantee of sexual freedom (relevant for sexual deepfakes) and consolidated Supreme Court and Constitutional Court case-law on privacy and own image configure a robust normative framework. Cooperation with the Central Technological Investigation Brigade of the National Police, the Telematic Crimes Group of the Civil Guard and the sectoral contact points of digital platforms orients prosecution. At Alonso Sala, with 15+ years' experience and a multidisciplinary team of criminal lawyers and forensic cybersecurity experts, we undertake the integral representation of fake profile victims and the technical defence of accused persons, with urgent procedural strategies for evidence preservation, identification of anonymous authors, content removal and complete civil reparation.
Our Specialized Investigative Services
Judicial IP Traceability
We request and manage judicial orders to operators and platforms to identify the physical connection from which the fake profile is managed.
Digital Evidence Certification
We use forensic and notarial capture tools to ensure that evidence is not deleted or challenged during the trial.
Experts at the Intersection of Law and Technology
Defense against fake profiles is not won only in court, but in the technical investigation phase. At Alonso Sala, we master the digital tools necessary to break network anonymity and bring those responsible to justice.
- Integrated technical teams of lawyers and IT experts.
- Direct management of account closures with Meta, Google, and TikTok.
- Immediate action protocols for reputational crises.
- Specialization in digital harassment and sexting via fake profiles.
Identity and Public-Function Usurpation: Penalties and Defence
Usurpation of another’s civil status (Art. 401 CP), usurpation of public functions (Art. 402 CP) and the offences against privacy and of illegal access to information systems (Arts. 197 and 197 bis CP) share the same evidential battleground: attributing authorship in digital environments. We work with forensic IT experts to counter every report filed by the prosecution.
Penalty Table: Identity Usurpation and Computer Offences
| Offence | Article | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Usurpation of another’s civil status | Art. 401 | Imprisonment 6 months – 3 years |
| Usurpation of public functions: performing acts proper to an authority or official while claiming official capacity | Art. 402 | Imprisonment 1 – 3 years |
| Unlawful practice of a profession | Art. 403 | Fine 12 – 24 months (6 – 12 months where the required qualification is an official, licensing one); imprisonment 6 months – 2 years in the situations of Art. 403.2 |
| Discovery and disclosure of secrets | Art. 197.1 | Imprisonment 1 – 4 years and fine 12 – 24 months |
| Dissemination, revelation or transfer to third parties of the data or images discovered | Art. 197.3, para. 1 | Imprisonment 2 – 5 years |
| Illegal access to an information system in breach of its security measures (hacking) | Art. 197 bis 1 | Imprisonment 6 months – 2 years |
| Knowing use of a false identity document | Art. 392.2 | Imprisonment 6 months – 1 year and fine 3 – 6 months |
Defence Strategies in Identity Usurpation
Usurping civil status versus one-off use of data
Art. 401 CP requires supplanting another’s identity as a whole, assuming their legal position with a degree of permanence. Using someone else’s data in isolation does not make out the offence and usually falls to lesser figures.
Fake profiles: identifying the applicable offence
Creating a profile in another person’s name may amount to usurpation, an offence against privacy or one against honour, depending on what is done with it. The correct characterisation determines the penalty and the competent court.
Attributing authorship in digital environments
An IP address identifies a connection, not a person. With shared networks, commonly used devices or leaked credentials, individual attribution of authorship is open to dispute and further evidence must be required.
Illegal access versus dissemination of what was found
Entering a system and disclosing what was found are not the same thing. Illegal access under Art. 197 bis 1 CP carries imprisonment of six months to two years; disseminating the data or images discovered carries two to five years (Art. 197.3 CP). Pinning down which conduct is charged transforms the sentencing framework.
Absence of intent to impersonate
Satirical, parody or critical profiles may lack the intent to pass oneself off as another. Without that supplanting purpose, the conduct may fall outside criminal law altogether.
Exercise of public functions (Art. 402 CP)
Claiming official capacity and performing acts proper to an authority or official is a standalone offence, punished with one to three years’ imprisonment and distinct from usurpation of civil status. The two should be separated from the initial characterisation onwards.
Looking for a Fake Social Media Profiles Defense Lawyer in Spain?
As a national law firm, we offer specialized criminal defense in courts across Madrid and the rest of Spain. We handle each Fake Social Media Profiles Defense case with the urgency and technical rigor it requires from day one.
Need urgent criminal defence?
Contact our specialist criminal defence lawyers. We evaluate your case confidentially.
Tools for your case
Do you need specialised legal assistance?
The judicial system is complex. We have the criminal-law specialisation and technical resources required to take on the defence.