START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
901,762 people care about Women's Rights

Shocking Twitter Stalking Case Dismissed as “Free Speech”

Shocking Twitter Stalking Case Dismissed as “Free Speech”

The headline on Kashmir Hill’s Forbes article says it all: “You have a constitutional right to stalk and harass people on twitter.”† Over a period of more than 18 months, Buddhist leader Alyce Zeoli received 8,000 harassing and threatening tweets from William Lawrence Cassidy. In 2010, Zeoli reported the harassment to the FBI and pressed charges. On Thursday, a federal judge dismissed the case, saying that “uncomfortable” speech on sites like twitter is protected by the Constitution.

Long, Calculated, Unrelenting Harassment

Zeoli and Cassidy met and became friendly in 2007, but eventually had a falling out. Then, starting in 2008, Cassidy began harassing Zeoli on twitter and on blogs, using a variety of different pseudonyms. The Forbes article provides an overview of the harassment:

From 2008 to 2010, a man named William Lawrence Cassidy tweeted at Buddhist leader Alyce Zeoli over 8,000 times, using the micro-messaging forum to criticize her looks, criticize Buddhism, describe cinematic ways that she could die and to tell her to commit suicide . Every time Zeoli blocked one of the accounts, Cassidy would create a new username.

Forbes also printed a sampling of the tweets (warning: offensive language) from the court evidence. The impact on Zeoli was severe. She was afraid to leave her house for more than 18 months because she thought Cassidy would hurt her.

Cassidy Arrested, but Case Later Dismissed

On Mashable, Todd Wasserman describes how Cassidy went from being arrested and jailed to having the charges against him dismissed:

Zeoli cooperated with the FBI, which had Cassidy indicted and put in jail in February on interstate stalking charges, a statute of the Violence Against Women Act. Cassidy sought to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that it violated the First Amendment. The judge in the case, Roger W. Titus, agreed with Cassidy’s assertion, concluding that the First Amendment “protects speech even when the subject or the manner of expression is uncomfortable and challenges conventional religious beliefs, political attitudes or standards of good taste.” Titus also cited the fact that Zeoli is a public figure (she was the subject of a book published in 2000) and ruled that Cassidy’s remarks didnít constitute a “true threat.”

For her part, Zeoli is incredibly upset about the ruling. In an e-mail, Zeoli’s lawyer Shanlon Wu wrote that his client was “appalled and frightened by the judge’s ruling” (source: New York Times). They have not yet decided whether they will appeal the ruling.

Judge Misunderstands Twitter

The judge in the case appears to misunderstand the nature of twitter. He noted that, unlike a “telephone call, letter or e-mail that is addressed to and directed at another person,” the postings on twitter (a “bulletin board”) could simply be turned on or off (source: New York Times). While it is possible to block people on twitter (just as you could block a particular phone number or e-mail address), there is nothing stopping that person from creating a new account and continuing the harassment. Twitter is, in fact, very much like a telephone call, letter or e-mail that is directed at another person.

Ruling Sends Wrong Message to Cyberbullies

On BlogHer, Stacy Morrison discussed the impact of the ruling in light of all the attention being given to the harm of cyberbullying:

This ruling is all the more surprising given all the attention that cyberbullying has gotten in the past year, as so-called “harmless” online communications led traumatized teenagers to take their own lives. And continuing research into teenagers and e-buse shows that constant monitoring via cell-phone texts creates as much self-esteem damage and anxiety as those comments would in person.

If we understand that the communication teens engage in via electronics is “real” and creates real damage and emotional devastation, then how is it possible that this is not what the judge understood in this case?

For people who live their lives to a great extent online, for both business and pleasure, being harassed in the spaces that they frequent can play a huge emotional toll and make them fear for their safety. The legal system needs to catch up and learn more about the nature of digital communications so that it doesn’t let harassment like this go unpunished.

Related Stories

Cyberbullying of Teachers On The Rise

Ultimate Fighter Jokes About Rape on Twitter

Read more: , , , ,

Photo credit: trekkyandy on flickr

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

133 comments

+ add your own
12:05AM PDT on Jun 2, 2012

This is the reason I do not have a Facebook, twitter or any such account. I'll never understand why people feel the need to post their life history anywhere online, or be anywhere that would expose them to constant harassment. The judge's ruling was fair and just. Government cannot control what we say or type, but we can control our exposure to it. Maybe people will discover once again the enjoyment of sharing with real in-person individuals.

9:05AM PST on Jan 9, 2012

The First Amendment is probably the most mistreated law *ever*. It seems it is mostly invoked for all the wrong reasons!

8:19PM PST on Dec 29, 2011

why is it free speech if done to "one of us", but a major crime if done to a government official...

2:22PM PST on Dec 27, 2011

So bullying and harrassment is acceptable according to the judge as it is his right to Freedom of Speech? The judge is an idiot.Who is he to decide what is a real threat?

12:15AM PST on Dec 25, 2011

This judge is a complete idiot! Seriously?! How is it that someone that doesn't even understand Twitter was aloud to rule on this case???

6:39PM PST on Dec 21, 2011

This judge needs an education.

11:29PM PST on Dec 19, 2011

Twisted

10:14PM PST on Dec 19, 2011

This judge should lose his job!!! What an idiot!!! The fact the person changed their account/name to keep bothering her should be stalking!!!!!

9:09PM PST on Dec 19, 2011

Thanks.

2:23PM PST on Dec 19, 2011

Seldom does the law protect anyone from harrassment or stalking. The law would, IF it was enforced

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Care2 - Be Extraordinary - Start a Care2 Petition
ads keep care2 free
CONTACT THE EDITORS

Recent Comments from Causes

It is a dying problem: anybody aged 20 in 1940 is 94 now. There are probably very few of them left,…

I love Big Cat Rescue. Tony the truck stop tiger should be there.

So so so so sad. I was aware they were not a lot of them left but SIX !

meet our writers

Julie M. Rodriguez Julie M. Rodriguez is an arts, green living, and political writer based in San Mateo, CA. Her work... more
ads keep care2 free



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.