Supreme Court decision could impact stalking cases in Hawaii; one Oahu victim shares her story

By Paul Drewes

Click here for updates on this story

    HAWAII (KITV) — U.S. Supreme Court justices made a key decision Tuesday on an online stalking case. A majority determined what is important is not the impact of messages on a victim, but the intent of the sender.

It is a decision that could impact cases in Hawaii.

“I worry for my safety. I can’t go outside and walk my dog on a public street, I always make sure I’m in an enclosed parking garage,” said Sunshine Smith (who is a KITV4 employee).

She is the victim of stalking and has a pile of paperwork documenting all the text messages and phone calls from a woman, who had been served a temporary restraining order more than a month ago.

“Since the TRO she continues to stalk me, calling me, texting me every single day. I got 197 phone calls the other day, saying things like ‘I am going to slit your throat’,” added Smith.

The woman was even arrested for violating the TRO, but prosecutors have only been able to use a handful of those incidents against her.

“In the text messages, and phone calls, if the stalker doesn’t ID herself and then use my name, they won’t use it. Because they said they can’t prove it was her voice or the intent for those messages,” stated Smith.

Intent is what Supreme Court justices focused on their ruling on Tuesday.

“They have decided to make it more difficult to prosecute people who stalk or send harassing messages or even violent threats – if prosecutors cannot prove the person had the intent to carry out the threat,” stated constitutional law attorney Jeff Portnoy.

In the latest ruling, the justices ruled a jury did not decide if a Colorado man truly intended to harm the victim. He sent messages to a woman on Facebook for two years. Some of the messages were weird, others were more threatening. Justices ruled that if he didn’t intend to harm her, then his views are protected free speech.

“It goes into the mind of the sender, and that is never easy to prove. It is going to make it more difficult to prosecute people who send harassing and maybe even threatening messages,” added Portnoy.

Smith worries this latest Supreme Court decision will make prosecutions even harder, and believes action is not taken soon enough after incidents of stalking and harassment.

“At what point does something have to happen, before she is charged?” she asked.

Some courts determined prosecutors have to show only that a “reasonable person” would consider a message to be a threat. Now the Supreme Court decided what matters is the intent of the person sending that message, text or phone call.

Please note: This content carries a strict local market embargo. If you share the same market as the contributor of this article, you may not use it on any platform.