Georgia is proposing to change a spousal privileges law that requires a married victim to obtain the permission of their abuser before they can testify against them. I’m not sure who ever thought that was a good idea.
San Francisco sheriff Ross Mirkarimi stated that domestic violence “is a private matter, a family matter” when asked whether or not he abused his wife. Even if he didn’t, no one benefits from silence about intimate partner violence except the perpetrators. Domestic violence advocates erected the billboard above to address his claims.
Check out this great stalking awareness campaign called Stalking: Know It. Name It. Stop It. Not only do they have promotional materials to raise awareness about stalking, there are also numerous resources related to safety planning, outreach materials, and information specific to responders like law enforcement and prosecutors.
Last year, the Men’s Anti-Violence Council developed a workshop about commonly exploited technology used to stalk and harass individuals. It has been extremely popular and we have presented it at numerous conferences and workshops. We’ll be presenting it next month at The Big Ten Counseling Center conference regarding how this topic relates to counseling centers and college students. Stay tuned for when we upload the Power Point from that presentation.
From 2008 to 2010, William Cassidy harassed Alyce Zeoli through Twitter sending her over 8,000 tweets. He criticized her looks, made fun of her religion, described graphic ways in which she could die, and repeatedly told her to commit suicide. Zeoli blocked his accounts but Cassidy just created another one. In 2010, Zeoli reported the harassment and the FBI pressed charges against Cassidy for stalking Zeoli and causing her “substantial emotional distress.”
However, this week federal judge Roger W. Titus, dismissed the case stating, “while Mr. Cassidy’s speech may have inflicted substantial emotional distress, the government’s indictment here is directed squarely at protected speech: anonymous, uncomfortable Internet speech addressing religious matters.” Apparently Judge Titus doesn’t really understand what Twitter is. He compared it to a colonial bulletin board where if you didn’t like something, you don’t read it. News flash Judge Titus, Twitter is no different from a text message, email, or phone call. It is direct contact through electronic means with another individual. Just telling someone to “ignore it, turn it off, or don’t look it” is about as good as telling a stalking victim to just block the phone number, quit their job, or simply ignore the animal head left in a box on the front porch. The message this sends to victims is ridiculously callous, “If you don’t like it, too bad, just ignore it.”
However, there was some protection from harassment and stalking enforced this week. A judge in Minnesota ordered a man to take down his “revenge” blog about his ex-girlfriend because individuals have a “right to be free from harassment”and instated a 50 year restraining order! But wait, isn’t a blog is like a colonial bulletin board? No, no it’s not.
Anyone in a position of enforcing or creating rules/laws/policies about harassment, stalking, bullying, or any other inappropriate conduct through electronic/Internet/technological means should have a basic understanding of what the Internet is and how social media services on it function. People should be protected from those who intimidate, threaten, harass, monitor, record, impersonate, and stalk them regardless of the method.
George Bronk just received a four year prison sentence for stalking and harassing women through Facebook and email. George would search Facebook profiles for information to assist him in hijacking email accounts to search for nude or provocative pictures. George would then distribute the pictures to everyone on their contact list and in some cases, blackmail the women to gain additional pictures. When contacted by a victim about why he was doing this, George responded, “Because it’s funny.”
George plead guilty in January to computer intrusion, false impersonation and possession of child pornography. He received four years in state prison for the Facebook and email charges and an additional eight months for the child pornography charges, which requires him to register as a sex offender. 46 women across 17 states came forward in this case as recipients of his illegal behaviors.
This case highlights the importance of taking online precautions but also being aware of security measures. You can create a formidable password, but pay attention to password recovery options. If the information needed to answer generic password recovery questions is available online throughout your social networks, it creates vulnerabilities. A lot of people may know where you went to grade school or your mother’s maiden name. This case also highlights the significance of electronic and Internet-based stalking and harassment. Numerous victims I have worked with dismiss the behaviors because they are afraid no one will take them seriously. “It’s just emails and text messages or comments on Facebook,” is something I hear frequently. 47 states have electronic and Internet-based language in their stalking and harassment laws. It doesn’t matter the means. These behaviors are illegal whether they happen in person or online. Cases like this set a precedent for future prosecution.
I know, I know, “Who cares, it’s just a commercial? Lighten up.” Skip it. Virgin Mobile created some creepy, unhealthy and illegal depictions about how their cell phone technology can be utilized to stalk and harass someone. Over 1 in 4 victims of stalking are harassed or monitored with technology. For those of you interested in learning more, MAC offers a Technology and Stalking workshop focused on awareness raising, prevention, and safety planning.
Joshua Ashby made New Zealand history this week. He became the first New Zealander to be convicted of a crime committed on the Internet under the country’s morality and decency laws. After a five month relationship ended, Ashby became violent and threatened the life of his former partner. He sent her text messages like “I’m going to kill you” and “Dead bitch.” He stole and destroyed some of her clothes. He also gained access to her Facebook account, replaced her profile picture with a nude picture of her, changed her password so that she could not remove it and removed all privacy settings so that it was visible by anyone.
Although the morality and decency laws were in regards to print media, the judge stated that the outdated laws needed updated to account for newer technology. Ashby plead guilty to all counts and received 4 months in prison. When he tried to cover up his face to prevent his picture from being taken the judge allowed it by humorously responding, “There was a certain symmetry to it.” I agree.
The Telegraph recently ran a story about television presenter, Alexis Bowater, who was “cyberstalked” for over two years. Alexander Reeve sent Alexis over 50 violent and sexual emails, many of which threatened her life and included threats that were graphic and sexual. He claimed that she would be found hanged and phoned in bomb threats to the studio where Alexis worked. Reeve was found guilty and sentenced to four years in prison. The article highlights a statistics that I had never seen before. As quoted in the article, Alexis states that 77% of stalking victims wait until 100 incidents have occurred before they contact the police.
The article does a good job of highlighting the constant stress, worry, terror and helplessness that many victims of stalking experience, which can often be exacerbated when technology and anonymity are involved.
“There are things that I was made to think that are kept in some quiet place in my soul because when somebody is telling you they’re going to do all these things you do believe them and live with it every day and night.”
“You don’t know what they (stalkers) look like, how old they are, what gender, whether they are doing it from nearby or abroad, if they are your next door neighbour, or someone in your office. You have no idea and that is terrifying.”
Click on the image below to see a video of Alexis describing her stalking and recent changes in British harassment laws.
U be dead is the title of a made for TV movie for ITV1 in Britain that chronicles the real life stalking case of Debbie Pemberton and Jan Falkowski by Maria Marchese. You can find a first hand account of the incidenthere. I’m going to post some quotes and details about the intensity, relentlessness and terrifying nature of the stalking below. Debbie and Jan suffered through this torture for 5 years and went to extreme lengths to escape their stalker.
As I scanned the words of my latest text, my hands trembled. “You will burn in your wedding dress,” it read. I was terrified. If I’d known then that would be the first of thousands, I don’t think I could have gone on.
I was receiving up to 10 threats a day. One said: “A bullet waiting for U. Gunman paid”, and another simply said: “U B Dead.” I became increasingly suspicious and paranoid, questioning the motives of everyone I met, from the stranger sitting next to me on the train to the person who pushed past me in the street.
We returned to the boat after a night out in the pub. Jan stepped in ahead of me, then shouted: “Get back!” The gas taps had been turned on. If we’d been out for much longer, the boat would have exploded the moment we turned on a light.
I didn’t even feel safe in my own home. Police traced calls and texts to phone boxes nearby, even to the station where I caught the train every morning – some had phones with keyboards where you could send texts to mobiles – this person knew our daily routines, where we lived and how I got to work for my job as a financial analyst.
A woman constantly bombarded my work department with calls, abusing my colleagues if they didn’t put her through. She even called the chief executive, saying I’d leaked sensitive information to the press.
I jumped if my phone beeped, terrified what was coming next. I could only doze for a couple of hours a night. My skin broke out in eczema and I lost a stone in weight.
We decided to move to a ‘safe house.’ We told no one our new address – not even our friends or family. I’d switch my phone off at night, trying to escape. But every morning, a flurry of hate messages would flood my inbox.
Our wedding was being destroyed by our stalker. I had to use a password when I spoke to the wedding venue, because our stalker had tried to cancel the booking four times. When that failed, she’d sent a text saying that she’d poison our guests.
I even considered killing myself, ending it all just so I’d be free.
The combination of my geek love for technology and my anti-violence work has created a fascination for learning all that I can about technologically facilitated stalking. People post so much personal information online. Do stalkers even need to follow you home and rifle through your garbage anymore to learn more about you? Apparently, all they need is a cellphone and data plan…
How I became a Foursquare cyberstalkerwritten by Leo Hickman and published in the Guardian last week was eery, fascinating, creepy and scary at the same time. Here’s the opening of the article.
Louise has straight, auburn hair and, judging by the only photograph I have of her, she’s in her 30s. She works in recruitment. I also know which train station she uses regularly, what supermarket she shopped at last night and where she met her friends for a meal in her home town last week. At this moment, she is somewhere inside the pub in front of me meeting with colleagues after work.
Louise is a complete stranger. Until 10 minutes ago when I discovered she was located within a mile of me, I didn’t even know of her existence. But equipped only with a smartphone and an increasingly popular social networking application called Foursquare, I have located her to within just a few square metres, accessed her Twitter account and conducted multiple cross-referenced Google searches using the personal details I have already managed to accrue about her from her online presence. In the short time it has taken me to walk to this pub in central London, I probably know more about her than if I’d spent an hour talking to her face-to-face. She doesn’t know it yet, but Louise is about to meet her new digital stalker.
Click Read More to learn even more about Louise and the implications of location based services…
An Australian man who created a Facebook page called “100 Biggest Sluts of Ballarat” could potentially face multiple charges of stalking. According to local police, 60 of the 100 women have been contacted by the police and interviews are being conducted. If charges are filed, the creator of the site would face one charge of stalking per victim, up to 100 counts.
The Facebook page listed the names of 100 women and girls from the town of Ballarat and made derogatory comments about them. Some of the girls were as young as 14.
In Australia, it is considered stalking if someone is “using the computer to offend or harass a particular person.” In the United States, online stalking behaviors can often tried as a federal crime because the information travels across state lines. Many states and college conduct policies include references to computers and technology in their stalking and harassment laws and policies. Depending on the nature of the behaviors, it is often tried as a felony.
For more information about stalking, visit the National Stalking Resource Center. They have some great information about state and federal laws, how to record stalking behaviors and a wonderful list of resources. Click on the image to the right for their brochure about stalking. It provides some great information about read flags. Pass this on to anyone you know that works with college students. Over half of stalking cases reported to the police in the United States are from individuals 18-26 years old. This crime is prevalent on college campuses and relevant to college-aged students.
Below is an excerpt from the University of Iowa anti-harassment policy.
Harassment” means intentional conduct directed toward an identifiable person or persons that is sufficiently severe, pervasive, or persistent that it interferes with work, educational performance, on-campus living, or participation in a University activity on- or off-campus.
Evidence of harassment. Behavior that may be considered evidence of prohibited harassment, if it meets the definition set forth in paragraph a above, includes, but is not limited to, the following:
repeated contact with another in person, by telephone, in writing, or through electronic means, after the recipient has made clear that such contact is unwelcome.
physical, visual, or verbal behavior directed toward another person or an identifiable group of persons that is intended to be or is reasonably likely to be interpreted as threatening or intimidating. Behavior that constitutes speech is included within this section only to the extent to which it has a direct tendency to incite an immediate violent reaction in a reasonable person or to place a reasonable person in fear of imminent physical harm.
harassment proscribed by the Iowa Criminal Code, Chapter 708, including, for example, stalking (708.11), the placement of simulated explosives (708.7), ordering merchandise or services with intent to annoy (708.7), or false reports to police (708.7).
