mfc@svfx.com said:
but does anyone know of any cases where a model has been physically assaulted or otherwise harmed by a user?
She wasn't assaulted, but the creep recognized her from a cam site and followed her around in the store (blurting out her model name out loud), tried to peek at her name on her credit card, and then grabbed her once she was outside. She hit him as hard as she could and got the hell outta there. The fact that she wasn't physically harmed doesn't excuse his behavior, and
anyone who would side with a creep like that is someone I'd worry about too.
This is pretty close to assault, I'd say. And it definitely meets the criteria for stalking in CA. Here's the law, described on a lawyer website:
In 1993, the California legislature amended Penal Code 646.9 PC to make the law significantly harsher.9 The new law expanded the definition of behavior that would qualify as criminal stalking and increased the potential penalties.10
California's current anti-stalking laws prohibit following or harassing another person, and threatening that person, with the intent of placing him/her in fear for his/her safety ... or in fear for the safety of his/her immediate family. If you engage in these activities...prosecutors could charge you with stalking under California Penal Code 646.9 PC.
1.2. The Legal Definition of Stalking in California
The legal definition of stalking in California refers to three facts the prosecutor must prove (otherwise known as "elements of the crime"):
that you willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly followed ... or willfully and maliciously harassed ... another person,
that you made a credible threat against that person, and
that you did so with the specific intent to place that individual in reasonable fear for his/her safety or for the safety of his/her immediate family
If the alleged victim claims to have had a temporary restraining order, injunction, or other court protective order against you, the prosecutor must additionally prove that a protective order against you was in effect at the time of your alleged illegal conduct, prohibiting you from engaging in such conduct.
So I was wrong in that its not necessary for the victim to ask the perp to stop, but for it to be a crime in CA, the perp has to engage the victim (possibly repeatedly) and either make a threat against her or her family (or pets, as I have learned) [believe it or not I was a stalking victim a few years ago... but thats a story for another day]
This is the point that I was observing- Googling someone's screen name might be something you don't like. But it's not stalking. "But it's the first step for stalkers" Yes. But getting out of bed is a first step for almost everybody too. How many of us have pasted a model or user's screen name into Skype to see if it works- this is not stalking, and I submit that its not even creepy. Trying to contact the person over and over or becoming abusive if the person doesnt answer- now that IS creepy. And it's probably punsihable under the stalking law.
mfc@svfx.com said:
But I also know a lot of paranoid girls. And technically, its only stalking if you ask them to stop, and they don't. I've been called a stalker by a model for asking a fairly innocent follow up question after a long conversation about a particular subject. I'm not making any comment about whether or not anyone got stalked, but experience suggests that some of the stalking fears are overblown, and some accusations of stalking may not actually amount to much.
This is disturbing. Experience? Do you have a habit of making models uncomfortable to the point where they're calling you a 'stalker'? And just because a model refuses to answer certain questions does not make her 'paranoid'. Is your curiosity
really worth pissing her off and getting yourself banned? Reminds me of that weirdo who called me 'paranoid' because I wouldn't give out my phone number like other girls do. :roll: Sounded like a case of butthurt for not being able to get what he wanted.