Ask Not for Whom the Bell Tolls–Ask Why: A Look at the Harassing Telelphone Call Statutes

People still use phones to bother and harass others, just like they did in 1980. In 1996, there were almost 600 complaints about this in Florida. But there isn’t much legal guidance for dealing with this problem. This article will look at the current laws in Florida and other places and suggest ways to interpret them. It will also offer some ideas for fixing the problems with these laws. In Florida, it is illegal to make obscene or harassing phone calls to someone who has a right to privacy. Other states have similar laws that have been upheld in court. It is also illegal to make a call without revealing your identity and with the intent to annoy or harass someone. This part of the law says that making an anonymous phone call can be punishable, even if the caller’s identity is obvious. In some cases, a caller doesn’t have to give their name, but just not say who they are. Some court cases have explored what it means to be anonymous, and it’s still not completely clear. The law prohibits making harassing phone calls. The term “repeatedly” has been interpreted differently in different court cases. In one case, making two calls was not considered “repeatedly,” but in another case, leaving four messages at one time was considered “repeatedly” even though they were not heard right away. The law in Florida is unclear about whether messages left on answering machines count as “conversation” under certain statutes. Other states have decided that messages left on answering machines can be prosecuted under the law. Some courts have said that leaving a message on an answering machine is still a form of communication. This issue should be clarified by the Florida Legislature. It’s illegal to keep calling someone’s phone and hanging up, especially if you’re doing it to harass them. It can be hard to prove who’s doing it, but if the person admits to it or keeps calling without being told to stop, they can still get in trouble. In one case, a guy called 911 just for fun and got in trouble for it. And in another case, a guy kept calling his ex-girlfriend and got in trouble even though she didn’t tell him to stop. Basically, when someone is charged with making harassing phone calls, the prosecutor has to prove that the person meant to cause harm or annoyance with the calls. This can be hard to prove, because the person making the calls might have a legitimate reason, like trying to resolve a problem. Just using angry or rude language in a call doesn’t automatically make it criminal. And if someone keeps calling and the conversation turns nasty, that might not be enough to prove the calls were made only to harass. It’s important to understand the distinction between different types of harassing calls, and to consider the context of the calls before deciding if they’re actually criminal. Basically, when someone is charged with making harassing phone calls, the court has to prove that the person intended to harass the other person. This can be tricky, because sometimes the person might have had other reasons for making the calls, like wanting to get back together with an ex. The court has to decide what the person’s intent was at the time they made the call. For example, in one case, the court found that a person who made a threatening phone call was actually just trying to talk about their problems, so they weren’t guilty of the offense. So, it’s not always easy for the court to prove that someone had the intent to harass when they made the call. When proving intent in cases of harassing phone calls, it’s important to use evidence beyond just the calls themselves. This can include testimony about other unwanted contact and the context of the calls. In some cases, the defendant’s actions, like making calls in the middle of the night or to someone who is now married, can show intent to harass. There can be challenges in proving intent under different parts of the law, so the state may also consider charging the defendant with stalking. Stalking involves a pattern of conduct that shows a continuity of purpose to harass someone. A person was charged with aggravated stalking for making harassing calls to his ex-wife, even though he argued it was protected by the First Amendment. The court said that stalking is not protected speech and can be a criminal offense. Evidence of the interaction between the victim and the defendant can be used in court to prove intent and the pattern of behavior. In cases of harassing phone calls, prosecutors should consider charging stalkers instead to avoid legal confusion. This may help them avoid potential issues with the harassing phone call statute. It’s important to consider the impact on the victim, rather than just the specific language used in the calls. Mark F. Lewis, a lawyer, supports this approach. This column is from the Criminal Law Section of The Florida Bar. It’s written by Claire K. Luten, the chair, and edited by Randy E. Merrill. The Florida Bar wants its members to do their duty and serve the public, improve how justice is carried out, and make the study of law better.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/ask-not-for-whom-the-bell-tolls-ask-why-a-look-at-the-harassing-telelphone-call-statutes/