“Internet harassment laws make it a criminal act to use the Internet to threaten, torment, stalk, intimidate or otherwise distress a person.”
Tomorrow I go before the court of San Francisco as a witness for my friends and neighbors.
However, while I will take a stand tomorrow against the actions of Brian and Sara, and my landlord Sonia Gioseffi, there are others parties and restraining orders involved from those who have harassed the Linares through the Internet.
Today Brian Burchmore filmed me, the Linares, and another neighbor, including filming me over my shoulder on my work laptop. [Disclosure: I am an employee of Apple, Inc.] Apple takes security and privacy very seriously. This is concerning beyond my own personal discomfort on the second incident. While he just video taped us in our face, their modus operandi, the larger issue, is the concern that Brian is using his private investigator equipment to eavesdrop. He is violating my reasonable expectation of privacy.
Thankfully, the incident tonight was after hours while sitting on the wall between their properties with Jacky, Maryline and Mark on the stoop. I wasn’t working on work, but I was writing up my notes for my appearance in court tomorrow, and talking on the phone with my momma.
Excerpts from: WiseGeek.com — What Are Internet Harassment Laws?
- California was the first state in the United States to pass anti-stalking legislation
- In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed the Communications Decency Act
- California was first to address cyberstalking in 1999, and many other states have passed specific Internet harassment laws. Still others have made provisions in existing anti-harassment laws to deal with Internet communications.
- Internet harassment laws make it a criminal act to use the Internet to threaten, torment, stalk, intimidate or otherwise distress a person.
Internet harassment is an attempt to use email or another form of electronic communication to torment, threaten, stalk or perform some similar act that would cause distress to a reasonable person. When determining the difference between simple rudeness and criminal harassment, authorities are likely to consider issues such as the attacker’s apparent intent, the frequency of the remarks or postings, evidence of premeditation or information gathering, whether others were encouraged to participate in these acts and whether remarks or attacks were directed specifically at the victim.
For those found guilty, the penalties for violating Internet harassment laws depend on the severity of the attacks and the jurisdiction. Harassment convictions can result in fines, community service or a prison sentence. If the victim made previous attempts to make the attacker stop, or if the attacker engaged in other illegal activities such as hacking to harass the victim, sentencing is likely to be harsher.
Stalking laws have been expanded to include “cyber stalking”.
Penal Code 646.9.
“Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his…”
This includes use of the internet or email.
Also, Penal Code 653m once used for only for annoying phone calls in the old days has long ago been brought up to date to include other electronic devices such as the internet or email.
Every person who, with intent to annoy or harass, … or makes repeated contact by means of an electronic communication device, … to another person is, … guilty of a misdemeanor.
Penal Code 646.9. (a) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family is guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison. (b) Any person who violates subdivision (a) when there is a temporary restraining order, injunction, or any other court order in effect prohibiting the behavior described in subdivision (a) against the same party, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.
(b) For purposes of this section, an impersonation is credible if another person would reasonably believe, or did reasonably believe, that the defendant was or is the person who was impersonated. (c) For purposes of this section, “electronic means” shall include opening an e-mail account or an account or profile on a social networking Internet Web site in another person’s name. (d) A violation of subdivision (a) is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment. (e) In addition to any other civil remedy available, a person who suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of subdivision (a) may bring a civil action against the violator for compensatory damages and injunctive relief or other equitable relief pursuant to paragraphs (1), (2), (4), and (5) of subdivision (e) and subdivision (g) of Section 502. (f) This section shall not preclude prosecution under any other law.
Penal Code 653m. (a) Every person who, with intent to annoy, telephones or makes contact by means of an electronic communication device with another and addresses to or about the other person any obscene language or addresses to the other person any threat to inflict injury to the person or property of the person addressed or any member of his or her family, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made in good faith. (b) Every person who, with intent to annoy or harass, makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by means of an electronic communication device, or makes any combination of calls or contact, to another person is, whether or not conversation ensues from making the telephone call or contact by means of an electronic communication device, guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made in good faith or during the ordinary course and scope of business. (g) For purposes of this section, the term “electronic communication device” includes, but is not limited to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video recorders, facsimile machines, pagers, personal digital assistants, smartphones, and any other device that transfers signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, or data. “Electronic communication device” also includes, but is not limited to, videophones, TTY/TDD devices, and all other devices used to aid or assist communication to or from deaf or disabled persons. “Electronic communication” has the same meaning as the term defined in Subsection 12 of Section 2510 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
Sara LeCain, available at http://www.margaretsimonneburchmore.com/January_2009/target55.html, June 18th, 2013
Brian Burchmore, available at http://www.margaretsimonneburchmore.com/January_2009/target18.html, June 18th, 2013
Sonia R. Gioseffi, available at http://www.klgates.com/files/Professional/0dd13d56-0a90-48d4-b060-418dcc0b476b/Presentation/Photo/Gioseff_Sonia.jpg, June 18th, 2013