Anybody who watches US TV cop shows knows that anything you say (at least, anything you say in front of cops) can be used against you in a court of law.
But a US judge has ruled that it’s not just what you say or write: communication that can get you into hot water includes merely tagging somebody on Facebook.
According to the New York Post, Maria Gonzalez, a New York woman, is facing a year in jail for having violated a protection order that forbade her from communicating with her former sister-in-law, Maribel Calderon.
The restraining order was related to Gonzalez’s divorce from Calderon’s brother, Rafael Calderon.
In one post, Gonzalez called Calderon “stupid.”
She said in another post that “you and your family are sad :(”.
Gonzalez argued that she didn’t understand that the restraining order included Facebook communication, in that it didn’t “specifically prohibit [her] from Facebook communication” with Calderon.
Westchester County Supreme Court Justice Susan Capeci didn’t buy it.
The New York Post quotes her decision:
The order of protection prohibited the defendant from contacting the protected party by electronic or any other means.
Gonzalez’s attorney, Kim Frohlinger, reportedly said that she had no plans to appeal the ruling.
This is just another lesson in how, as one lawyer pointed out to the Post, anything we post, anywhere, can be possibly used against us.
It doesn’t have to be self-incriminating selfies – like, say, the felon who proudly showed off his .45-caliber semiautomatic by pointing its laser sight at his own noggin in a Facebook-shared self portrait that netted him more than 15 years more jail time.
It can be plain old Facebook tagging when you’ve been told to stay away from somebody, no communication allowed.
Getting yourself a year in the pokey for having called somebody else “stupid” is just the irony cherry on top of this clueless cupcake.
Image of Woman on laptop courtesy of Shutterstock.com
Megan
Interesting. Not to say what Maria did was right, but if Maribel went to the trouble of getting protection order against Maria, why was Maribel still Facebook friends with her? Why didn’t Maribel block her so that this couldn’t have happened in the first place? If Maribel really needed a protection order it seems like she should have taken some steps to protect herself as well.
Keith
The article doesn’t say they are Facebook friends. According to Facebook help you will get a notification if someone your are not friends with tags you in a photo or other post.
saxonrau
But not if you block them. Once you block someone on FB they can’t tag you, although they can type your name in the comments (but it won’t link to your profile or alert you or your friends). So not blocking your harasser seems like a strange thing to do – like choosing to go and hang around outside their house would be a strange thing to do. (Ok that’s not a perfect analogy but as a way of making it vastly more likely that you’ll have an interaction with someone it’s quite similar). An exclusion order really does require BOTH parties to keep away from each other.
Shelly Kay Rowland
Totally agree with you!
Stephanie
Well you didn’t get it. She isn’t facing jail because she called someone stupid. She is facing time for violating a restraining order. She is harassing her sister-in-law.
Shelly Kay Rowland
If her sister in law wanted NO contact with her, she should not have remained friends on Facebook. This is stupid and should be thrown out!
Kaladin
I have been following you guys for years. While I may not share all of your opinions I respect them. Your more recent posts on securing social media “SEND THE ABSOLUTELY WRONG MESSAGE”. As an analyst I can list hundreds of publicized incidents that could be used to express why it is important to protect yourself at all times, including your choices. Someone needs to take step back and review the tone of your own posts. I know you are not trying to support criminal or unjust activities, but your articles are not from the point of view of the victim. They are from that of the wrongful party. 3/4s of the article is about the individual who has done wrong, then you follow up with; “oh if your an average Joe secure your online presence”. That’s not how they read. Please, practice what you preach, think be fore you post.
Jon
The title of this article is misleading. The crime isn’t she tagged someone, it’s that she violated a restraining order.
roy jones jr
Now that I’m reading the title again, I think it could be re-done to include “restraining order” somewhere in there.
But it is good to know that Facebook can be used for good.