I’m a domestic violence victim, and I never thought I would be,” says 38-year-old Melanie Johnson as she details her cyberstalking experience to me. “People try to give unsolicited advice all the time — call the police, get a restraining order — like I haven’t tried these things over and over again. It’s just not as easy as everyone thinks.”
Johnson’s story is one of absolute horror. She met a man on an online dating site, and they had a relationship for a year and a half. After she broke it off — she says he had a terrible temper and she could see a pattern of abuse emerging — he began emailing and calling her relentlessly, threatening suicide. She says he tried to hack into her Facebook and Instagram accounts over 400 times, according to email notifications she got from each site.
Over the course of two years, things got even worse. He allegedly harassed her friends and family members online; he posted her home address, place of employment and child’s name on a Craigslist ad stating she was a prostitute; and he even posted secret recordings he’d made while they had sex on a pornographic website and included with it a link to her Facebook profile.
Once he allegedly began threatening to rape and kill her, and burn her house down, she was forced to move from her home of 10 years and transfer her son to another school.
Because of the way North Carolina’s cyberstalking law is written (a 2012 report says the state is one of only six with laws specifically targeting the act), it’s often difficult to obtain a protection order against a cyberstalker, and even harder to convict one.
The data is sparse, but a 2009 federal report showed the conviction rate for those charged was only 14.9 percent in North Carolina. The burden of proof is sometimes extremely difficult to meet because without witnessing someone type out an email or text, you can’t prove beyond a shadow of a doubt it was that person who sent it.
Johnson tried five times in Mecklenburg County to file charges against her stalker and obtain a protection order. The first time, she went to a magistrate (who has since been terminated) who refused to issue the order and told her North Carolina’s laws were outdated. The female magistrate told Johnson they made her concerned that if she acted upon them as written, her job would be in jeopardy.
The law, which took effect on Dec. 1, 2000, may have been written intentionally vague so it could easily be applied as technology advances year by year. It states that it’s illegal to electronically communicate language threatening to damage property or injure another person, or the person’s relative or dependent, with the intent of abusing, harassing, embarrassing, or extorting money or things of value. It does not define the term harassing, though.
It also makes it illegal to (1) electronically communicate any knowingly false statement regarding the death, injury or illness of the person, or any member of the person’s family, with the intent to abuse, harass or embarrass or (2) allow an electronic device under the person’s control to be used for any prohibited act under this statute.
A violation is a Class 2 misdemeanor, which carries a maximum prison term of up to 60 days.
Critics of the state’s cyberstalking law say it’s not specific enough and essentially make it illegal for someone to annoy someone else by email.
The magistrate in Johnson’s case may have been worried about blowback if she acted on the law as written, but Johnson says it discouraged her from seeking further help for a long time.
But in July 2013, she sought another protection order after her ex allegedly sent her a photo of a gun he’d just purchased. She was denied an order that time because the judge said she didn’t seem emotional enough.
“At that point, I was done crying. I was pissed,” Johnson says. The judge warned her stalker his actions were criminal and verbally ordered him to stop contacting her. Three hours after they left the courtroom, the guy began calling her again.
Another problem that makes it difficult to get protection from a cyberstalker is that they oftentimes are more technologically savvy than judges or lawmakers.
Kate (not her real name), 28, tells the story of being denied a protective order because when she explained in court her stalker, a guy who works in information technology, had installed software on her Android phone that recorded every call and sent him a satellite image of her location upon request, the defense attorney exclaimed, “That’s not even possible!” The judge believed him.
“I mean, what was I supposed to do?” the 28-year-old says. “Call in the software developer as a witness?”
Even if the judge had believed her, the law doesn’t specifically mention this type of violation. Kate ended up having to toss her Android and buy a less sophisticated phone. Replacing the one she’d had previously was too costly for a single mother who was unemployed at the time, and her service provider had no program to help her.
In March 2011, it was widely reported in the media that more than 50 apps for Android phones were “modified to invade user privacy.” Despite an FBI crackdown on one developer, it’s likely the number has grown since.
An NPR survey earlier this year found that 85 percent of women’s shelters across the country reported women in their care who had been tracked by their abuser using the GPS on their phone.
But cyberstalking isn’t a problem exclusive to women. A survey by the organization Working to Halt Online Abuse found 40 percent of cyberstalking victims are male.
According to the same organization, in 2013, North Carolina had the eighth highest rate of cyberstalking offenders in the U.S.
Johnson’s stalker was eventually arrested after she began working with Detective Keith Way, a CMPD officer with special expertise in cyberstalking cases. Way could not comment for this story, as the case is still pending.
“The judge finally heard me,” Johnson says, “but I think if I didn’t have the detective on my side, I would’ve been herded through like cattle with everyone else there that day.”
Her stalker will go to trial on charges of cyberstalking, stalking and phone harassment early next year.
I asked Johnson why she hadn’t just deleted her social media accounts and changed her email address two years ago. “I wanted to see updates from my family,” she says. “I wanted to see photos of my nephews being born. I’ve had the same email for my entire adult life. I shouldn’t have to enter the witness protection program because of this man. The law should protect me.”
Earlier this month, she created a petition to Gov. Pat McCrory and state Rep. Rodney Moore on Change.org urging them to update stalking laws and create a registry of offenders.
“Luckily I have an amazing manager at my job,” she says, “but what about people who can’t spend five hours at the magistrate’s office on numerous occasions? We have to make this easier.”
This article appears in Dec 10-16, 2014.
Such is life
What a great article!!! Thank you for only hitting the surface of my story! It is great to actually see it in print and to see that I am not the only victim out here dealing with the same issues! It’s good to see that my story is reaching the masses, even my actual stalker who still thinks that he can control my emotions, actions, and life through manipulation and intimidation…We have all said enough is enough!!! Thanks for sharing my story, more to come…peace and blessings!
From what I’ve read on Facebook about this case from both parties it seems like the accuser is also guilty of stalking the ex. Making fake profiles to contact his friends, threatening his family and etc from fake #’s in texts and other questionable tactics. Two sides to every story yet when women shed the 1st tear it’s as if their story is made more believable. If that is the case the both of you are in the wrong but I’d be interested to see how this plays out. Good luck to ya
I don’t see anything above about the victim stalking anyone & I can’t imagine what kind of threat the victim could levy at the perverts family. There shouldn’t be two sides to the story, when she said I Don’t Want Him, the story should have ended. For conversation sake, let’s say she was forced to try to stop the stalking through questionable actions on social media, don’t blame her, it appears our courts were failing her. I wish the article had posted a link to her change.org petition,, this guy is mentally ill, she needs to be protected.
https://www.change.org/p/patrick-mccrory-rodney-moore-revamp-existing-laws-concerning-domestic-violence-stalking-creating-a-national-domestic-violence-registry
There is no such thing as a supposed victim for conversation sake doing questionable things through social media to get back at their ex for whatever reason they chose to. If that is true and can be proven in court then the case has itself is in jeopardy. There was a similar case where the accuser sent deregatory messages to the subjects friends to antagonize the accused and a cyberteam tracked them by their I.P. Too many instances women are allowed to make false accusations against men especially if their is a history between the two that shows a pattern of false claims and dismissed court cases. The city of Charlotte makes a killing with these domestic violence cases because the two involved have been downtown more then once or twice and gotten back together later. I’d like to hear his side of the story because as a man who has been falsely accused by an ex only to have the case thrown out I tend to question the validity of said claims. You are innocent until proven guilty or unless you’re a black man killed or beaten by white cops you are automatically innocent to the members of the black community. Not so much with domestic disputes. It is the females word taken as truth, always.
NC can pass all the laws they like. How effective will they be if the stalker is in another state?
Here are the fake profiles the lady in this article created to send messages to the accused friends on Facebook. That’s why there are two sides to every story. There is a facebook group called This is my story that the accused created detailing the messages that this woman In this article sent to him and his family throughtout this ordeal. The family reported the threatening messages to the Detective investigating the case but because of his relationship to the supposed victim he did not pursue it and is currently being investigated by I.A. http://i.instagram.com/stalkerpatroling/ or https://m.facebook.com/home.php?refsrc=https%3A%2F%2Fm.facebook.com%2Fhome.php&refid=8&_rdr#!/profile.php?id=1027279317
The Facebook profile in question sent multiple messages to various friends of the accused on Facebook in attempts to locate him and sent msgs stating he had bothered her along with other harassing messages. The profile picture on the fb page is also the same one that is used in the supposed victims mobile uploads seen on Facebook that has been identified to her. Even if the profile is removed the msgs sent by her can’t be and the fb login is traceable to her I.P. This whole article is a farce and we support the accused based on the evidence.
This article is not a farce. It was fact checked and confirmed by multiple sources. It’s intent is to call out serious flaws in our justice system for victims of this ever-increasing crime seeking assistance. We chose to highlight two women’s stories as examples of these flaws. Thank you for reading.
Not to piggyback from what that V for Vendetta stated but things that were overexaggerated in the article is the victim moving from her residence of 10 years which was not true. She had only lived in her residence for less then 2 years. Also missing is the history the two have had in the courts previously which is public record which shows a previous restraining order that was tossed out and a previous criminal case that the woman never showed up to court for. Also we at /b/ have seen the multiple messages sent out from the woman in the article to the various members of a facebook user who is connected to the accused. You have not fact checked all sides just one side. If you need to confirm this there is a facebook user by the name of Atom Kane who can verify this woman sent these messages stalking the accused. Fact check that then visit our board at /b/
Is it true she’s dating the detective handling the case?
So Emmanuel Lewis III, you stated that there’s statements on Facebook from both parties on this issue… Can you please link me to information and statements made by the defendant in Melanie’s case since you’ve seen it already?
If you dont know the defendant in the case already how can you be linked to their statements. Send him a facebook friend request.
Via Facebook: The defendant had his Cyber stalking charge that he was accused of dismissed as well as 2 other charges of phone harassment. He did plead guilty to one count of misdemeanor stalking and was sentenced to probation with no jail time. I guess no one won in this case and the law is truly vague in what you can do to protect yourself from online abuse. Or she in fact did not have enough evidence to prove her case fully and partially lied. In these cases the burden of proof is very minimal so you in fact don’t have to provide much proof to lock someone up in Mecklenburg county.
yes im being harassed also by a police woman who thinks i want her man when it was about losing weight i have gotten so much jealously going on its ridiculous that i had to show them i can get a man sometimes its best to be by yourself alot of women are insecure this is why they lose they man she has tapped my phone cut my clothing took my vitamins down to my food and soap and is probably on this laptop now she knows i know
Suppose the following scenario occurs; Person A initiates email correspondence with Person B, whom Person A found on the Internet and even though Person B is not out to harm Person A or anyone else and has never threatened Person A or anyone else nevertheless, Person A changes Person A’s email address without telling Person B what Person A’s current email address is thus Person B has no way to contact Person A, Person A never told Person B to stop sending Person A email or not to contact Person A through Facebook or any other social media, and Person A never told Person B what Person B did wrong that Person A no longer wants anything to do with Person B anymore like Person A used to do. Person B sends email to people whom Person A had contacted by means of CC and/or whom Person A knows and Person B tells these people the fact that Person B is worried about Person A, asks these people if Person A is alright, tells these people the fact that Person B hopes that Person A is alright, and asks these people to ask Person A to contact Person B. Why do the laws designate these behaviors done by Person B as stalking, cyberstalking, and/or harassment in spite of the fact that Person B is not out to harm Person A or anyone else and has never threatened Person A or anyone else?
Also, what can Person B do to prove the fact that Person B is not out to harm Person A or anyone else and has never threatened Person A or anyone else?
Furthermore, I have created a petition on the matter and here is the link to the petition; https://www.change.org/p/u-s-house-of-representatives-us-senate-stop-branding-harmless-people-as-stalkers-cyberstalkers-and-harassers
Please reply.