BS harassing me

[2themoon&back]

HA HAAAA! I WORK in criminal justice, so come on out of your own la la land.

 

donnymabe, I do as well and there are many cases where this can and does happen.

 

First a complaint has to been made and if the person has any proof or documentation to verify what they are saying to be true, then a temporary RO can or will be issued until the complaints have been investigated further. Law enforcement will not ignore any threat to AP which it has been reported, without checking the validity of it, it could leave them at risk for fault if something does happen and they did nothing when the complaint was made.

 

Now sometime after the investigation has been completed there may be a permanent RO implemented or the RO dismissed depending on what the outcome of information gathered is.

 

I repeat that in my state infidelity is not illegal but stalking and harassment are.

[donnamaybe]

donnymabe, I do as well and there are many cases where this can and does happen.

 

First a complaint has to been made and if the person has any proof or documentation to verify what they are saying to be true, then a temporary RO can or will be issued until the complaints have been investigated further. Law enforcement will not ignore any threat to AP which it has been reported, without checking the validity of it, it could leave them at risk for fault if something does happen and they did nothing when the complaint was made.

 

Now sometime after the investigation has been completed there may be a permanent RO implemented or the RO dismissed depending on what the outcome of information gathered is.

 

I repeat that in my state infidelity is not illegal but stalking and harassment are.

I really doubt that someone posting things that someone else doesn't like reading on a FB page could be construed as "harassing" in a court of law. Particularly when it is so SIMPLE to disallow ANYONE but those who are on your friends list from posting on your page let alone even SEE your page.

 

There have to be valid grounds for taking up the court's time with a RO.

[2themoon&back]

I really doubt that someone posting things that someone else doesn't like reading on a FB page could be construed as "harassing" in a court of law. Particularly when it is so SIMPLE to disallow ANYONE but those who are on your friends list from posting on your page let alone even SEE your page.

 

There have to be valid grounds for taking up the court's time with a RO.

 

Cyber Bullying is valid grounds and would not be a waste of time if the threats are serious.

 

 

You do not have to be friends with a person and most likely will not be friends with someone on fb that may be harassing you on their page, and that you can stop with the help of LE.

 

 

Look at the epidemic with teen suicides due to “cyber bullying”. It is VALID grounds.

 

Sorry for the T/J.

[BB07]

I would think that the first thing that would be asked if you went to law enforcement/judge about F/B harassing they would ask..........well did you take the measures to block them?

 

The horse goes in front of the wagon.

[2themoon&back]

I would think that the first thing that would be asked if you went to law enforcement/judge about F/B harassing they would ask..........well did you take the measures to block them?

 

The horse goes in front of the wagon.

 

 

That is possible but doesn't change the seriousness of a threat or harassing behavior over the internet.

 

I am sure they will ask a lot questions, but to say they will not do anything if the threats or harassment warrants them to, is not true.

 

Agreed?

[donnamaybe]

It is VALID grounds.

 

Sorry for the T/J.

That is for the courts to decide, and, IMO, if a courtroom full of professional law personnel were brought in by a grown woman who was sneaking around with the husband of a woman who is posting hateful things on her FB page, and it is easily preventable by simply a few clicks of the mouse, I'm pretty sure they would NOT consider that valid grounds to bring a complaint. The OP did NOT say there were any threats.

[2themoon&back]

That is for the courts to decide, and, IMO, if a courtroom full of professional law personnel were brought in by a grown woman who was sneaking around with the husband of a woman who is posting hateful things on her FB page, and it is easily preventable by simply a few clicks of the mouse, I'm pretty sure they would NOT consider that valid grounds to bring a complaint. The OP did NOT say there were any threats.

 

You are right, but a compliant has to be made First right.

 

Defamation of charter which has been a part of our (in the US) legal system a long time is against the law. Also, though being mean is not against the law, harassing is. And if a woman who has been sneaking around with another woman’s H, does not excuse the W’s behavior in the laws eyes, only in the human aspect of it.

 

I see where PIH has started a thread about this issue and I guess that is where this should be discussed.

[BB07]

That is possible but doesn't change the seriousness of a threat or harassing behavior over the internet.

 

I am sure they will ask a lot questions, but to say they will not do anything if the threats or harassment warrants them to, is not true.

 

Agreed?

 

If you are specifically talking about facebook, no I don't agree and I don't see how a court/law enforcement would agree either because it's simple to block someone.

[2themoon&back]

If you are specifically talking about facebook, no I don't agree and I don't see how a court/law enforcement would agree either because it's simple to block someone.

 

 

But you cannot block what they say on their page, which could be just as damaging IRL.

[donnamaybe]

But you cannot block what they say on their page, which could be just as damaging IRL.

And is she were to state "So and so has been having an A with my H" it would be absolutely true, so there would be no recourse.

[2themoon&back]

And is she were to state "So and so has been having an A with my H" it would be absolutely true, so there would be no recourse.

 

 

You are right!!!

 

But If she says anything threatening then there would be.

 

All I am saying, instead of splitting hairs, is that LE will check into any compliant of harassment no matter how they go about it if a complaint is made and has viable facts to back it up.

[Owl]

But you cannot block what they say on their page, which could be just as damaging IRL.

 

But what they say on their own page isn't "stalking".

 

It could be slanderous or libel, and therefore potentially against the law. But that would only matter if the person it was aimed at decided to take it to court...and then the veracity of the statements would have to be proven/disproven.

 

Somehow I'm thinking that the affair partners aren't going to want to have to have all of this reviewed in that manner.

 

Stalking is a different critter...and as was stated already, one of the first questions I would expect a judge to ask would be to find out what steps the "stalkee" has taken to ensure that the stalker knows that their actions are unwelcome. If she's not blocked facebook...it's probably a moot point.

[donnamaybe]

But what they say on their own page isn't "stalking".

 

It could be slanderous or libel, and therefore potentially against the law. But that would only matter if the person it was aimed at decided to take it to court...and then the veracity of the statements would have to be proven/disproven.

 

Somehow I'm thinking that the affair partners aren't going to want to have to have all of this reviewed in that manner.

 

Stalking is a different critter...and as was stated already, one of the first questions I would expect a judge to ask would be to find out what steps the "stalkee" has taken to ensure that the stalker knows that their actions are unwelcome. If she's not blocked facebook...it's probably a moot point.

Exactly, Owl.

 

What brought me to get into this conversation were these blase statements like "Just get a restraining order" or something to that effect, making it sound like all you have to do is ask and *voila* you get one.

 

It just does NOT work that way.

[2themoon&back]

But what they say on their own page isn't "stalking".

 

It could be slanderous or libel, and therefore potentially against the law. But that would only matter if the person it was aimed at decided to take it to court...and then the veracity of the statements would have to be proven/disproven.

 

Somehow I'm thinking that the affair partners aren't going to want to have to have all of this reviewed in that manner.

 

Stalking is a different critter...and as was stated already, one of the first questions I would expect a judge to ask would be to find out what steps the "stalkee" has taken to ensure that the stalker knows that their actions are unwelcome. If she's not blocked facebook...it's probably a moot point.

 

 

Owl you are correct, and I don't think this was originally about "stalking" or any of what is being discussed now ….. As much as attaining a RO.

 

If a person feels threatened by another person’s action, it is possible to get an RO, even if temporary.

 

That is all I am saying ... Really

 

To dismiss this as a possibility is not entirely correct.

[NoIDidn't]

You are right, but a compliant has to be made First right.

 

Defamation of charter which has been a part of our (in the US) legal system a long time is against the law. Also, though being mean is not against the law, harassing is. And if a woman who has been sneaking around with another woman’s H, does not excuse the W’s behavior in the laws eyes, only in the human aspect of it.

 

I see where PIH has started a thread about this issue and I guess that is where this should be discussed.

 

I'm not saying anything about the OP of this thread, as I haven't really followed it.

 

But, in general, its not defamation if its true. And, the law is generally not to step in and tell FB how to monitor its business when the actual user affected is not reporting it to them. If its not reported, its considered allowed.

[2themoon&back]

Exactly, Owl.

 

What brought me to get into this conversation were these blase statements like "Just get a restraining order" or something to that effect, making it sound like all you have to do is ask and *voila* you get one.

 

It just does NOT work that way.

 

I have never said it does.

 

I have said it is possible and being in this field you should already know that.

[donnamaybe]

If a person feels threatened by another person’s action, it is possible to get an RO, even if temporary.

 

So a person shoots someone a dirty look and flips 'em off and they, therefore, feel threatened they can get a RO?

 

Nope. Sorry.

[donnamaybe]

I have never said it does.

 

I have said it is possible and being in this field you should already know that.

No, it's not possible as described, and I DO already know that having worked in this field for over 25 years.

[2themoon&back]

No, it's not possible as described, and I DO already know that having worked in this field for over 25 years.

 

Then we may have to agree that your country, state, laws or different than mine.

[2themoon&back]

So a person shoots someone a dirty look and flips 'em off and they, therefore, feel threatened they can get a RO?

 

Nope. Sorry.

 

Not the same thing as the written word.

[donnamaybe]

Not the same thing as the written word.

No, but just because some FEELS something such as threatened does NOT mean a threat was made.

 

It is VERY clear what constitutes a threat, and just calling someone a bitch or whatever is NOT a threat.

 

Good gawd.

[2themoon&back]

No, but just because some FEELS something such as threatened does NOT mean a threat was made.

 

It is VERY clear what constitutes a threat, and just calling someone a bitch or whatever is NOT a threat.

 

Good gawd.

 

 

I don’t know why you feel the need to make your point over and over and excuse mine, but to me, this no discussion is no longer any use for this thread or the original topic.

 

As for me I will stop here and allow you to make all the “good gawd” points you need to because I do not agree with you that a person can request help from LE, when they feel harassed or threatened with Proof, that LE will just dismiss it, has been dicussed and is done, we do not agree on this point.

 

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, which IMO, is what is happening here so I will stop... Thank you for the discussion.

[donnamaybe]

I don’t know why you feel the need to make your point over and over and excuse mine, but to me, this no discussion is no longer any use for this thread or the original topic.

 

As for me I will stop here and allow you to make all the “good gawd” points you need to because I do not agree with you that a person can request help from LE, when they feel harassed or threatened with Proof, that LE will just dismiss it, has been dicussed and is done, we do not agree on this point.

 

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, which IMO, is what is happening here so I will stop... Thank you for the discussion.

Oh, goody!

 

At least you have finally acknowledged there needs to be PROOF of a threat, and NOT just someone's feeling.

 

Bye now.

[2themoon&back]

donnymabe, I do as well and there are many cases where this can and does happen.

 

First a complaint has to been made and if the person has any proof or documentation to verify what they are saying to be true, then a temporary RO can or will be issued until the complaints have been investigated further. Law enforcement will not ignore any threat to AP which it has been reported, without checking the validity of it, it could leave them at risk for fault if something does happen and they did nothing when the complaint was made. Now sometime after the investigation has been completed there may be a permanent RO implemented or the RO dismissed depending on what the outcome of information gathered is.

 

I repeat that in my state infidelity is not illegal but stalking and harassment are.

 

This is my Originally post… please tell me you read it before you started it to discredit it?

[donnamaybe]

JUST like I thought!