Making Threats on the Interwebz...

[CalebToNowhere]

If documented, can threats made to you by Facebook users be cause for prosecution for intimidation? I have a friend who is going through a nasty divorce. Some of her Facebook friends are making physically violent threats toward him. My friend has forwarded on the details to his attorney. Bad situation. How likely is it for the Police to get involved?

 

[EvilBlackGun]

Be sure

to reply to all those messages, and it will help to document them if needed. Posting a time, and date, and year will also help.

If documented, can threats made to you by Facebook users be cause for prosecution for intimidation? I have a friend who is going through a nasty divorce. Some of her Facebook friends are making physically violent threats toward him. My friend has forwarded on the details to his attorney. Bad situation. How likely is it for the Police to get involved?

 

[Scutter01]

If documented, can threats made to you by Facebook users be cause for prosecution for intimidation? I have a friend who is going through a nasty divorce. Some of her Facebook friends are making physically violent threats toward him. My friend has forwarded on the details to his attorney. Bad situation. How likely is it for the Police to get involved?

Yes. The internet does not protect you from the consequences of acting like a d-bag. In fact, if anything, the internet makes it incredibly easy because there's a record of dates, times, IP addresses, etc. all of which can be subpoenaed.

 

[CalebToNowhere]

Thanks. I'm trying to find some IC but not having much luck. I just talked to my friend again and he is certainly pressing charges if he can.

 

[SSGSAD]

IANAL, but IMHO, Yes they can .... if I say I am going to kick your butt, that is Intimidation, a misdeamenor .... if I say I am going to KILL you, that is Intimidation, a FELONY !!!!! I am sure a LEO, or someone who is smarter than I will link, or something special like that !!!!!

 

[jmiller676]

I would say yes but, how do you go about proving that it was said person making those comments. It is easy to say my account was hacked or some similar excuse.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

Screen shots...screen shots...screen shots.

Also, if he has email alerts, a lot of the times, the text of the message will come through in the email alert, even if it's subsequently deleted by the poster from the FB page.

Have him SAVE and DOCUMENT EVERYTHING. Back it up. Back it up online (in an email acct or two) and on a few flash drives.

-J-

 

[CalebToNowhere]

Good point, I had not thought of that. IP address, mobile phone apps... I bet there are tools that could be used.

I would say yes but, how do you go about proving that it was said person making those comments. It is easy to say my account was hacked or some similar excuse.

 

[SideArmed]

I would say yes but, how do you go about proving that it was said person making those comments. It is easy to say my account was hacked or some similar excuse.

That would just be adding purjury to the list of charges against said individual.

Things said on the internet most certianly can be entered in as evidence in a court room. I have been there when things said on another forum were attempted to be used against me.

 

[rbrthenderson]

Facebook is also logging everything including messages sent to you. You can request this log be sent to you in a ZIP file. It includes dates and times.

 

[Sylvain]

Some people already had to go to court for insulting other people on Facebook.
So death threats would be even worse.
Doing it online is no different than sending actual letters in the mail.
Many people think that what they do online is no part of "real life" but they do prison time in real life for crimes comitted online.

 

[eldirector]

A friend works in the DA's office. Yes, they have successfully prosecuted folks for this.

Document it ALL. Don't respond to ANYTHING. Heck, don't post a single word on FB until this is settled. The DA's office can get records for FB if needed.

 

[TTravis]

I started up and ran an ISP (Internet Service Provider) business for over 15 years. I have dealt with many similar situations. The thing to do is go to your local law enforcement, probably city our county police. If they think is is serious, they will get a warrant and contact facebook through their LE only channels and get the IP address, date, time, etc. Then they will take that information to whoever is in controll of the IP address. If it is a cable or DSL company for example, they can look at the log files and find out who it is. You have to work through law enforcement. They will do nothing without a warrant.

 

[jmiller676]

Good point, I had not thought of that. IP address, mobile phone apps... I bet there are tools that could be used.

That would just be adding purjury to the list of charges against said individual.

Things said on the internet most certianly can be entered in as evidence in a court room. I have been there when things said on another forum were attempted to be used against me.

The problem is you CANT prove that that said person actually typed that unless you had a witness to them typing the statement.

 

[eldirector]

The problem is you CANT prove that that said person actually typed that unless you had a witness to them typing the statement.

Sure you can.

FB knows the date/time it was posted, and from what IP address. The ISP/carrier knows the physical location and/or device that has that IP. Correlate the two, and you have pretty good evidence (eg: it was posted from your work computer while you were at work, or from your cell phone immediately before and after you talked with someone). 100% certainty isn't needed, just more than reasonable doubt.

 

[goinggreyfast]

I am fairly certain that the Prosecution of one student who shot a classmate here in Martinsville this past year used his Facebook entries as evidence.

 

[eldirector]

Don't forget all of the recent bullying/suicide prosecutions. Most/all of the threats were on facebook. Some even used "shill" accounts, but were still easily traced.

The Internet is far from anonymous for 99% of the population. It is pretty tough to not leave tracks.

 

[GuyRelford]

The Intimidation statute just requires a "threat" made for a particular purpose; e.g., "to place someone in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act." (Note that a threat alone is insufficient.) The statute is silent as to the manner of communicating that threat, so there's no reason to think that a threat delivered over the internet is any less illegal than any other threat. Here's the statute:

IC 35-45-2-1
Intimidation
Sec. 1. (a) A person who communicates a threat to another person, with the intent:
(1) that the other person engage in conduct against the other person's will;
(2) that the other person be placed in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act; or
(3) of causing:
(A) a dwelling, a building, or another structure; or
(B) a vehicle;
to be evacuated;
commits intimidation, a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) However, the offense is a:
(1) Class D felony if:
(A) the threat is to commit a forcible felony;
(B) the person to whom the threat is communicated:
(i) is a law enforcement officer;
(ii) is a judge or bailiff of any court;
(iii) is a witness (or the spouse or child of a witness) in any pending criminal proceeding against the person making the threat;
(iv) is an employee of a school corporation;
(v) is a community policing volunteer;
(vi) is an employee of a court;
(vii) is an employee of a probation department; or
(viii) is an employee of a community corrections program.
(C) the person has a prior unrelated conviction for an offense under this section concerning the same victim; or
(D) the threat is communicated using property, including electronic equipment or systems, of a school corporation or other governmental entity; and
(2) Class C felony if, while committing it, the person draws or uses a deadly weapon.
(c) "Threat" means an expression, by words or action, of an intention to:
(1) unlawfully injure the person threatened or another person, or damage property;
(2) unlawfully subject a person to physical confinement or restraint;
(3) commit a crime;
(4) unlawfully withhold official action, or cause such withholding;
(5) unlawfully withhold testimony or information with respect to another person's legal claim or defense, except for a reasonable claim for witness fees or expenses;
(6) expose the person threatened to hatred, contempt, disgrace, or ridicule;
(7) falsely harm the credit or business reputation of the person threatened; or
(8) cause the evacuation of a dwelling, a building, another structure, or a vehicle.

 

[CalebToNowhere]

The Intimidation statute just requires a "threat" made for a particular purpose; e.g., "to place someone in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act." (Note that a threat alone is insufficient.) The statute is silent as to the manner of communicating that threat, so there's no reason to think that a threat delivered over the internet is any less illegal than any other threat. Here's the statute:

Thanks, Guy. I'll pass this on.

 

[Mosinguy]

Don't forget all of the recent bullying/suicide prosecutions. Most/all of the threats were on facebook. Some even used "shill" accounts, but were still easily traced.

The Internet is far from anonymous for 99% of the population. It is pretty tough to not leave tracks.

I am the 1%.






Time to change my IP address again