Cys

With contemporary society's easy access to high-tech methods of communication, crimes involving Internet usage have increased rapidly. Many stalkers find the Internet an easy, anonymous and convenient method by which to harass, stalk, intimidate and terrorize their victims:

"The veil of anonymity allows the perpetrator to exercise power and control over the victim by threatening the victim directly or posting messages that lead third parties to engage in harassment and threatening behavior toward the victim."
(Stalking and Domestic Violence. May 2001 Report to Congress. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, NCJ 186157.)

Recently, the U.S. Department of Justice's Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) convened a meeting of a national focus group to gather information about the needs of stalking victims. One of the victims in attendance at the meeting described how her stalker widely disseminated false information on the Internet about her, claiming that the victim was available for sex, and listing her address and phone number. Stories like this one are common in cyberstalking cases.

To date, Federal prosecution of cyberstalking has been more successful than State prosecution, partially because many States do not have adequate anti-stalking statute in place that applies specifically and explicitly to high-tech terrorism. Too, many law enforcement agencies lack the expertise and resources to respond to cyberstalking cases in an aggressive fashion. Some internet service providers (ISPs) have no protocol in place to deal with cyberstalking.

Little has been firmly established about this high-tech crime. Most of the available evidence concerning cyberstalking is anecdotal in nature and does not exist in hard form, compiled with systematic scientific research techniques. The facts and information which follow in this chapter about cyberstalking is extracted from Stalking and Domestic Violence, May 2001 Report to Congress, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs NCJ186157:

The majority of cyberstalkers are men and the majority of their victims are women, although there have been reported cases of women cyberstalking men, and of same-sex cyberstalking.
In many cases, the cyberstalker and victim had a prior relationship, and the cyberstalking began when the victim attempted to end the relationship.
There have been many instances of stranger cyberstalking.
The Los Angeles District Attorney's office recently estimated that cyberstalking is a factor in an estimated 20% of the approximate 600 cases referred to its Stalking and Threat Assessment Unit. Manhattan District Attorney's Sex Crimes Unit also estimated that cyberstalking is involved in approximately 20% of the Unit's cases. The Computer Investigations and Technology Unit of the New York City Police Department estimates that over the last 3-4 years, almost 40% of its caseload involved electronic threats and harassment.
An estimated 25% of stalking incidents involving college women can be classified as cyberstalking crimes.
One major ISP recently reported receiving approximately 15 complaints per month of cyberstalking, in comparison to virtually no complaints of cyberstalking in 1998-1999.
More than 80 million adults and 10 million children have access to the internet in the U.S. Assuming that the proportion of cyberstalking victims is even a fraction of the proportion of persons who have been the victims of offline stalking, the potential exists for cyberstalking victim numbers to far exceed the number of conventional-method stalking victims.
The internet provides opportunities for access to personal, private and confidential information about potential victims for the cyberstalker. Many web sites provide access to unlisted telephone numbers and maps with detailed directions to a victim's home or office, and some web sites offer social security numbers, financial information and other personal information about potential victims.

While some stalkers might hesitate to contact their victims through conventional methods, such as telephoning, driving by the home or appearing at the workplace of the victim, the same stalkers might feel completely comfortable and safe from detection and arrest while sending harassing or threatening electronic communications anonymously. For other stalkers, cyberstalking may be only a precursor to more serious behavior, including physical violence:

"More sophisticated cyberstalkers use programs to send messages at regular or random intervals without being physically present at the computer terminal. California law enforcement authorities say they have encountered situations in which victims repeatedly received the message "187" on their pagers--the section of the California Penal Code for murder."
A common tactic of cyberstalkers is to post the victim's name, telephone number, mailing address, and e-mail address on a web site's bulletin board or in a chat room with an invitation to contact the victim, or with a controversial message, causing the victim to receive multiple e-mails from strangers and unknown sources. A controversial message posted in a chat room, for instance, may be about the victim, causing other persons to contact the victim without the victim's consent or desire. On the other hand, the anonymous nature of the internet may allow the cyberstalker to post an inflammatory message while posing as the victim, causing the victim to receive threatening messages from other persons who view the cyberstalker's message. The cyberstalker's true identity may be concealed with little effort on the cyberstalker's part simply by using different ISPs or by adopting a different on-line name. Sophisticated cyberstalkers may make their unwanted contacts through the use of an anonymous "remailer", rendering the source of an e-mail virtually impossible to isolate.

Actual cyberstalking incidents noted in the May 2001 Report to Congress on Stalking and Domestic Violence:

In the first successful prosecution under California's new cyberstalking law, prosecutors in the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office obtained a guilty plea from a 50-year-old former security guard who used the internet to solicit the rape of a woman who rejected his romantic advances. The defendant terrorized his 28-year-old victim by impersonating her in various internet chat rooms and online bulletin boards, where he posted, along with her telephone number and address, messages that she fantasized of being raped. On at least six occasions, sometimes in the middle of the night, men knocked on the woman's door saying they wanted to rape her. The former security guard pleaded guilty in April 1999 to one count of stalking and three counts of solicitation of sexual assault. He faces up to 6 years in prison.
A local prosecutor's office in Massachusetts charged a man who, using anonymous remailers, allegedly engaged in a systematic pattern of harassment of a coworker, which culminated in an attempt to extort sexual favors from the victim under threat of disclosing past sexual activities to the victim's new husband.
An honors graduate from the University of San Diego terrorized five female university students over the internet for more than a year. The victims received hundreds of violent and threatening e-mails, sometimes receiving four or five messages a day. The graduate student, who has entered a guilty plea and faces up to 6 years in prison, told police he committed the crimes because he thought the women were laughing at him and causing others to ridicule him. In fact, the victims had never met him.
The cyberstalker may be a former friend or lover of the victim's, a total stranger, possibly someone met in a chat room, or it may simply be someone who enjoys playing practical jokes. The knowledge that the stalker could be anyone, anywhere (from across the city, or across the nation, from another country, or a co-worker, classmate or neighbor) adds to the heightened feeling of fear and vulnerability that the victim feels.

Despite the evidence on cyberstalking crimes available, law enforcement agencies across the U.S. have typically been slow in developing responses to this crime, either because of a lack of knowledge and information, or because of a lack of basic resources and training:

"A woman filed a complaint with her local police agency after receiving numerous telephone calls in response to a notice posted on the Web by a man claiming her 9-year-old daughter was available for sex, and providing her home phone number with instructions to call 24 hours a day. The agency's response was that she should change her telephone number. Instead, she contacted the FBI, which opened an investigation. It was discovered that the local police agency did not have a computer expert and the investigative officer had never used the internet. The local agency's lack of familiarity and resources may have resulted in a failure to understand the seriousness of the problem and the response options available to law enforcement."
Another reason for poor law enforcement response to cyberstalking, cited by the May 2001 Report to Congress on Stalking and Domestic Violence, is that it appears that few cyberstalking victims actually report cyberstalking crimes to law enforcement, either because the victim feels that the cyberstalking behavior has not reached a level that could be defined as a crime, or because they doubt law enforcement will take their complaints seriously.

In addition, there exists real barriers to the investigation by law enforcement of cyberstalking complaints. For instance, the cyberstalker may be a resident of one State, while the victim is the resident of another State, and jurisdictional issues develop as a result, necessitating investigation and intervention on a federal level, by either the FBI or the U.S. Attorney's Office.

The Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 (CCPA) poses yet another obstacle to investigation and prosecution in cyberstalking cases since the CCPA prohibits disclosure of cable subscriber records to law enforcement agencies without a court order and advance notice to the subscriber. With the latest trend of cable companies providing internet service, the CCPA now impedes investigation in cyberstalking cases where the stalker's ISP is a cable company since under CCPA, the investigating law enforcement agency must notify the cyberstalker that the agency has requested the cyberstalker's subscriber records.

As internet use becomes more and more a part of daily use by increasing numbers of people around the world, law enforcement agencies and other criminal justice actors will find they necessarily must create new approaches to investigative technique and new responses to cybercrimes. ISPs will also necessarily have to create stiffer on-line agreements, complaint protocol and policies for investigating and following up on complaints from customers about cybercrimes. Establishing and maintaining these types of heightened security for customers will naturally place a greater demand on the ISPs financial resources, forcing many small or entrepreneurial ISPs out of business and causing others to raise the cost of providing internet service.

Much remains to be done to protect internet users from cybercrimes. Many States do not have cyberstalking-related statutes. Even fewer Tribal Nations have code in place that protects internet users from cyberstalking. All States and Tribal Nations should review their laws to ensure they prohibit and provide appropriate punishment for these types of crimes.

Also, while federal law exists to combat cybercrimes, the law has limited application. 18 U.S.C.S. 875(c) makes it a crime to transmit any communication in interstate or foreign commerce containing a threat to injure another person, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000. This statute applies to any communication transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce--including threats transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce through telephone, e-mail, beepers and the internet. However, this law applies only to communications of "actual threats" and cannot be used in cases where a stalker engages in a pattern of conduct intended to harass or annoy another, absent of actual threat. Too, it may not apply in situations where a person harasses or terrorizes another by posting messages on a bulletin board or in a chat room, encouraging others to harass or annoy the victim.

Federal law, 47 U.S.C.S. 223, makes it a federal crime, punishable by up to 2 years in prison, to use a telephone or telecommunications device to annoy, abuse or threaten any person at the number called. The statute also requires that the offender has not revealed his or her name. However, Section 223 is only a misdemeanor offense, and applies only to direct communications between the perpetrator and victim, not to situations where a cyberstalker harasses another person through posting messages on a bulletin board or in a chat room, encouraging others to harass or terrorize the victim.

The 1996 Interstate Stalking Act (18 U.S.C.S. 2261A) makes it a crime for any person to travel across State lines with the intent to injure or harass another person and, in the course thereof, to place that person or a member of that person's family in a reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. 18 U.S.C.S. 2425, signed into law in October 1998, also protects children against on-line stalking, making it a crime to use any means of interstate or foreign commerce (such as the internet) to communicate with any person with the intent to solicit or entice a child into unlawful sexual activity.

Most cyberstalking cases will fall within the jurisdiction of State and local authorities, but when State (or Tribal) law is inadequate or insufficient to provide protection for the victim, the U.S. Attorney's Office and/or the FBI should be notified of the facts of the crime, so that federal law may be applied if possible. Internet users should also urge their ISP to engage in actively educating law enforcement and other criminal justice personnel in the uses of the internet and methods for investigating cybercrimes, and to also develop and distribute educational materials to customers on how to protect themselves while online. ISPs should also consider ways to involve other ISPs in the industry to adopt "best practices" policies and procedures which could promote better internet security. In addition, ISPs might create and enforce policies prohibiting cyberstalking and other cybercrimes, terminating the accounts of persons who violate such policies and establishing an industry-wide code of conduct and tracking information registry on offenders.

Cyberstalking Prevention Tips
(From Stalking and Domestic Violence. May 2001 Report to Congress. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, NCJ 186157, pg. 16.)

Do not share personal information in public spaces anywhere online, nor give it to strangers, including in e-mail or chat rooms. Do not use your real name or nickname as your screen name or user ID. Pick a name that is gender and age neutral, and do not post personal information as part of any user profiles.
Be extremely cautious about meeting online acquaintances in person. If you choose to meet, do so in a public place and take along a friend.
Make sure that your ISP and Internet Relay Chat network have an acceptable-use policy that prohibits cyberstalking. If your network fails to respond to your complaints, consider switching to a provider that is more responsive to user complaints.
If a situation online becomes hostile, log off or surf elsewhere. If a situation places you in fear, contact a local law enforcement agency.
If you are receiving unwanted contact, make clear to that person that you would like him or her not to contact you again.
Save all communications for evidence. Do not edit or alter them in any way. Also, keep a record of your contacts with Internet system administrators and law enforcement officials.
You may want to consider blocking or filtering messages from the harasser. Many e-mail programs such as Eudora and Microsoft Outlook have a filter feature, and software can be easily obtained that will automatically delete e-mails from a particular e-mail address or that contain offensive words. Chat room contact can be blocked as well. Although formats differ, a common chat room command to block someone would be to type/ignore<person's screen name> (without the brackets). However, in some circumstances (such as threats of violence), it may be more appropriate to save the information and contact law enforcement authorities.
If harassment continues after you have asked the person to stop, contact the harasser's ISP. Most ISPs have clear policies prohibiting the use of their services to abuse another person. Often an ISP can try to stop the conduct by direct contact with the stalker or by closing his or her account. If you receive abusive e-mails, identify the domain (after the "@" sign) and contact that ISP. Most ISPs have an e-mail address such as abuse@"domain name"or postmaster@"domain name" that can be used for complaints. If the ISP has a web site, visit it for information on how to file a complaint.
Contact your local police department and inform its officers of the situation in as much detail as possible. In appropriate cases, they may refer the matter to State or Federal authorities. If you are afraid to take action, there are resources available to help you. Contact the National Domestic Violence Hotline, 1-800-799-SAFE (phone) or 1-800-787-3224 (TDD), or a local women's shelter for advice and support.

Cyberstalking and Safety Tips

Back to Homepage