Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Where the GIT's are going -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alan Smithee who wrote (184513)	10/13/2009 4:28:26 PM
From: mph	Respond to of 225578

Facebook Poke Could Lead to Jail Time By Caleb Groos on October 12, 2009 11:52 AM \| No TrackBacks In another example of "now you can do it through Facebook," a Tennessee woman might face repercussions including jail time for Facebook "poking" someone in violation of a protective order. Typically, when we hear about protective orders we think about protection from physical violence, like forbidding someone from coming within 100 yards of another person. Courts, however, can and do include many other forms of protection in protective orders. They routinely forbid contact in all forms, whether it's carrier pigeon, mail, fax, telephone, email, or a Facebook "poke." A Facebook poke is a quick message you can send another Facebook user, causing them to see an icon on their Facebook page indicating that you've poked them. Though it seems something that wouldn't need saying, don't "poke" someone who has a protective order against you. And if you get poked by someone you've got a protective order against, take a look at the protective order and contact your attorney, because the order has likely been violated. Though her attorney declined to give ABC News details about the underlying protective order, Shannon Jackson, 36, was subject of a court order to stay away from another Tennessee woman. The order included prohibition from "telephoning, contacting or otherwise communicating with [the alleged victim], directly or indirectly." Obviously, a Facebook poke would be amongst the forbidden communications. Though it might seem fleeting, poking someone in violation of a protective order could fit squarely into the kind of harassment that protective orders often seek to stop. The only real difference with a Facebook poke will be evidentiary. In this case, the victim printed a screen shot showing the poke. If the matter proceeds, it will need to be shown that the poke in fact came from or with the involvement of Ms. Jackson. As in many states, violating a protective order can bring jail time in Tennessee. In this case, the alleged "poker" could reportedly face almost a year in jail.