BILL ANALYSIS �
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