Cyberstalking - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Cyberstalking and Cyberharassment

H.B. 151House Judiciary CommitteeTuesday, May 12, 2015Lori Siwik

1Slide2

Cyberstalking and Cyberharassment

The internet provides culprits with the ability to reach a vastly broader audience. The internet makes it easier for the culprit to reach his victim and more difficult for the victim to avoid his stalker/harasser.Cyberstalking and cyberharassment cause instant, public and constant harm to the victim– which compounds the invasion of privacy and ultimately the impact on the victim.

Cyberstalkers

often send messages directly to their victims. The severity of the harassment or threats may be heightened in

cyberstalking because the cyberstalker does not confront his victim physically.Cyberstalkers can deceive other internet users into harassing or threatening victims.The cyberstalker may set up a website about the victim with personal or fictitious information, so as to sully the victim’s reputation or encourage unwanted contacts from others.Cyberstalking is attractive to stalkers because it is easily accessible and affordable. The stalker can conduct the criminal activity from his home. (Sources: Scott Hamack, Note, The Internet Loophole: Why Threatening Speech On-Line Requires a Modification of the Courts’ Approach to True Threats and Incitement, 36 Colum. J.L. & Soc. Probs. 65, 81-83 (2002); Naomi Harlin Goodno, Cyberstalking, a New Crime: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Current State and Federal Laws, 72 Mo. L. Rev. 125 (2007); Kimberly Wingteung Seto, “Note: How Should Legislation Deal with Children as the Victims and Perpetrators of Cyberstalking?”, 9 Cardozo Women’s L.J. 67 (2002).

2Slide3

Cyberstalking and CyberharassmentPersonalities and Behaviors

Most desire power and control over their victims’ lives. (Source: Barbara Fullerton, CyberAge Stalking, Dec. 22, 2003)Cyberstalkers are more intelligent and better educated than other criminals. They are described as fairly lonely, isolated, highly intelligent, impulsive, cunning, resourceful, understand how to be anonymous, and know computers.

(Source: Barbara Fullerton,

CyberAge

Stalking, Dec. 22, 2003)Cyberstalkers and Cyberharassers have an illusion of invisibility (Source: Dr. Michael Nuccitelli, Cyberstalking and Online Predators)Cyberstalkers and Cyberharassers have a belief that freedom of speech has no limitations (Source: Nancy Willard, J.D., Center for Safe & Responsible Internet Use)3Slide4

Cyberstalking and CyberharassmentThe Siwiks’ Experience

The Siwiks’ former neighbor built a shed in violation of the Homeowners Association restrictive covenants. Lori Siwik advised the former neighbor of the restrictive covenants before his construction of the shed. The former neighbor ignored Lori’s advice, sought the advise of another neighbor (“current neighbor”), and with the help of the current neighbor, continued construction of the shed.Other neighbors on the street complained to the Homeowners Association. The Homeowner Association asked the former neighbor to stop construction of the shed. He refused and continued to build the shed with the help of the current neighbor.

The Homeowner’s Association sued the former neighbor. One of his legal defenses was lack of knowledge of the restrictive covenants. The

Siwiks

became witnesses for the Homeowner’s Association in the litigation.The trial was set for October 2005. The stalking and harassment of the Siwiks by the current and former neighbors began in earnest on September 11, 2005. The use of computers and other technology were key ways the current and former neighbors stalked and harassed the Siwiks.4Slide5

Cyberstalking and Cyberharassment

The Siwiks’ ExperienceThe stalking and harassment of the Siwiks included the following:Cutting down a large healthy tree and running the branches through a commercial wood shredder while the Siwiks hosted an outdoor party to thank family and friends for helping during Mark

Siwik’s

emergency open heart surgery.

Sitting on his driveway by the sidewalk and waiting for Lori Siwik as she walked her dog so that he could call her several offensive names. Falsely accusing the Siwiks of crimes.Falsely accusing the Siwiks of violation of the restrictive covenants in the Homeowners Association and demanding their personal paperworkMaking several telephone calls to the Siwiks then hanging up when the phone was answered. Yelling at Lori Siwik every time he saw her outside.5Slide6

Cyberstalking and CyberharassmentThe Siwiks’ Experience

Jumping out in the street to yell at Lori Siwik as she drove past the former neighbor’s house Posting defamatory and/or harassing signs in their yardsGoing out late at night (assumed to be a local bar), returning home after 2:00 a.m. and intentionally setting off his car alarm – did this repeatedlyPlaying music so loud that the Siwik house shook and vibrated (the police were called and the former neighbor was arrested).

Standing on his property yelling obscenities

Sending several unwanted and offensive emails to the

Siwiks at their place of employment. Used 4 different email addresses to get around their employer’s computer spam filter.Sending an offensive fax 113 times to Lori at her office tying up her employer’s fax machine.Encouraging others to stalk and harass the Siwiks.Creating a defamatory and harassing website for the sole purpose to stalk and harass the Siwiks. The website went through several changes, sometimes daily, over several months and became increasingly more threatening. 6Slide7

Cyberstalking and CyberharassmentThe Siwiks’ Experience

In the fall of 2005, after receiving several emails at work from the former neighbor, Lori Siwik filed a police report with the Richfield, Ohio police. The former neighbor was warned by the police to stop sending the emails and faxes. While the unwanted emails and faxes stopped, because the Richfield police mentioned in the police report that there was nothing that could be done about the former neighbor’s website, the stalking and harassment via the website escalated.After his arrest for noise disturbance, the former neighbor demanded a jury trial and argued that the Siwiks

were stalking and harassing him. When the City Prosecutor told the former neighbor that the City would drop the charges against him if he would stop stalking and harassing the

Siwiks

, the former neighbor responded by saying, “I’ll think about it.”7Slide8

Cyberstalking and CyberharassmentThe Siwiks’ Experience

By February 2006 the former neighbor’s website had a picture of Mark and Lori hanging in effigy from his shed, and the current neighbor posted a message on the website’s message board that said, in essence, “What goes around, comes around. The Siwiks will pay for the terrible things that they have done to you.” Even after the former neighbor moved out of state, the cyberstalking and cyberharassment via the internet continued for months.

In March 2006 the

Siwiks

filed a 7 page police report with the Broadview Heights police detailing every incident of stalking and harassment by the former and current neighbors. The Siwiks were repeatedly told by the police and the local prosecutors that there was nothing that could be done about the website and the threats on the website. The Siwiks were also told that they would have to wait until they suffered bodily injury at the hands of their stalkers before the police could do anything.8Slide9

Cyberstalking and CyberharassmentThe Siwiks’ Experience

Mark Siwik talked to a national expert on stalking, Mark Wynn. Mr. Wynn spent over an hour talking to Mark Siwik and reviewing the former neighbor’s website. After reviewing the website, Mr. Wynn advised that “[the Siwiks] had every right to be concerned. He had seen things end very badly for victims in similar circumstances.”9Slide10

Why Criminalization of Cyberstalking and Cyberharassment is Necessary

Civil remedies are insufficient and inappropriate to deal with cyber-victimization issues.Civil lawsuits are expensive, take a long time to pursue, and are ineffectiveCyber-victimization is better suited to prosecution under criminal law, which seeks to punish and deter wrongdoing.(Source: Kate E. Schwartz, “Note: Criminal Liability For Internet Culprits: The Need for Updated State Laws Covering the Full Spectrum of Cyber Victimization”, 87 Wash. U.L. Rev. 407 (2009).

10