The first person convicted under the California state online stalking statute was Gary S. Dellapenta , a 50-year-old security guard who decided to generate some unwanted notoriety for his former girlfriend. In this case, the stalker’s conduct was purely online, although it generated real-world consequences. Dellapenta posted messages on America Online and sent e-mail messages purportedly from the woman stating that she had “rape fantasies”—and soliciting assistance in living out those fantasies. The messages included her home telephone number, address, and instructions on how to disable her home security system. Six people decided to take up “her” offer and dropped by her apartment (she was not physically harmed by these visitors). Criminal charges were brought against Dellapenta for stalking, computer fraud, and solicitation of sexual assault, and he was sentenced to 6 years incarceration. A similar false impersonation case in Korea that involved the culprit forging offers of sexual services in the name of the victim resulted in a warrant for the arrest of a man on criminal slander charges.
People v. Kochanowski in 2000, involved a man who asked a coworker to help set up a Web site. The site contained suggestive photographs of his former girlfriend, along with her address and telephone numbers. The page also contained what the court described as “express references to intimate body parts and attributed to [the girlfriend] an infatuation with sex”. The woman then began receiving disturbing calls at work. The court found that the former boyfriend was guilty of violating the New York statute prohibiting “aggravated harassment” that prohibited certain intentionally annoying or alarming communications. Kochanowski argued in his defense that he had not made the alarming calls, which would have been a violation of a protective order the woman had obtained prohibiting the man from communicating with her. The court found it sufficient under the aggravated harassment statute, however, that he had intentionally caused such alarming communications to be made by others (although the court did not find the specific terms of the protection order violated by Kochanowski’s Web site).
Other examples demonstrate the international reach of online harassment—it may be just as easy to stalk someone on the other side of the planet as it is to stalk someone up the street. In the case of Rhonda Bartle, international online harassment did lead to an attempted real-world encounter. Bartle, a New Zealand author, started exchanging e-mail messages with Peggy Phillips, an American writer living in California. When the 84-year- old Phillips showed that she was interested in a deeper relationship than Ms. Bartle wanted, Ms. Bartle decided to end the relationship. Ms. Phillips commented about feeling suicidal and then took a plane to New Zealand. Bartle told the local taxi company not to take anyone to her house. When Phillips attempted to order a cab, the taxi company called the police, who then served Phillips with a trespass notice. After returning home, Phillips continued sending her unwanted e-mail messages (which, for the most part, were automatically filtered out of Bartle’s e- mail). Because New Zealand did not have online stalking laws at the time, Bartle contacted the Orange County, California, police in an effort to have them enforce the California law against Phillips. (Unfortunately, news accounts did not state whether this proved productive.) Australian courts have also been faced with a jurisdictional fight over where an online stalking case can be heard against an Australian man who stalked a Canadian actress by e-mail.
