BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 157 Page 1 ASSEMBLY THIRD READING AB 157 (Campos) As Amended April 22, 2013 Majority vote JUDICIARY 9-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Wieckowski, Wagner, |Ayes:|Gatto, Harkey, Bigelow, | | |Alejo, Chau, Dickinson, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian | | |Garcia, Maienschein, | |Calderon, Campos, | | |Muratsuchi, Stone | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, | | | | |Hall, Holden, Linder, | | | | |Pan, Quirk, Wagner, | | | | |Ammiano | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Effective July 1, 2014, adds false impersonation to the list of activities that may be enjoined under the Domestic Violence Protection Act. Specifically, this bill includes credibly impersonating or falsely personating, as defined, in the list of activities for which a protective order may be issued under the Domestic Violence Protection Act on or after July 1, 2014. EXISTING LAW : 1)Allows a court to issue a domestic violence protective order enjoining a party from molesting, attacking, striking, stalking, threatening, sexually assaulting, battering, harassing, telephoning, destroying personal property, and other specified behaviors. 2)Allows protective orders to be issued ex parte, after notice and a hearing, or by a judicial officer after assertions by a law enforcement officer that the person is in immediate and present danger of domestic violence. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, minor absorbable costs for the Judicial Council to amend a form and revise a rule of court. COMMENTS : The growth of social media and online communications AB 157 Page 2 has had tremendous benefits for our society, but has also provided a new venue for domestic abuse. Batterers can, with relative ease, impersonate their victims in an effort to further abuse them. To combat this, this bill adds false impersonation to the list of activities that may be enjoined under a protective order issued under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act. In support of the bill, the author writes: False impersonation and online identity theft is becoming an increasingly common tactic of abuse for domestic violence victims. The popularity of Facebook, Twitter and other online technologies and the ease with which someone can create, assume and/or misuse another person's online presence have provided a new and devastating tool for abusers. As such, it is important that protective orders should evolve to reflect the new technological realities. Judges are seeing more and more instances of allegations and evidence that an abuser has used a domestic violence victim's name and created a false Facebook page or Twitter account. Typically the abuser will post inflammatory statements designed to alienate the victim from friends and family, disrupt the victim's online presence, or damage the victim's reputation and cause embarrassment. AB 157 would help judges reviewing domestic violence protective orders to know that "high- tech abuse" is clearly considered abuse in the Family Code. Not all law enforcement jurisdictions will respond with criminal investigations in these cases and victims have limited remedies. As such, these types of abuse should be clearly enumerated and not force judges to try and fit this conduct under existing prohibitions such as disturbing the peace or harassment when deciding whether to grant or deny orders. The first case prosecuted under California cyberstalking law provides a chilling example of the harm that can be done through false impersonation and the need for protection against this type of abuse. According the United States Attorney General's AB 157 Page 3 account of the crime, the batterer impersonated a woman who had rejected his romantic advances and posted on Internet bulletin boards and chat rooms that she fantasized about being raped. He also posted her address and phone number. According to the account, men knocked on the woman's door at least six times saying they wanted to rape her. While this batterer was convicted of his crime, more should be done to better protect victims by preventing this type of domestic abuse before it occurs. This bill makes clear that judges can issue protective orders to restrain batterers from abusing and harassing their victims through false impersonation. In support of the bill, the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence writes: Some abusers will use their knowledge of the victim's passwords to lock them out of their internet accounts, including email, social media, and other accounts. In today's reality, where so much information is transmitted online, losing access to those accounts can have a dramatic impact on a survivor's daily life. Further, abusers will often use their access to the victim's social networking sites and email accounts to post private, intimate photographs, which can shame and intimidate a survivor. The misuse of technology to abuse and stalk victims is a growing reality, and AB 157 will help to address this harmful tactic. Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0000277