Click on images and links to open in a separate window.
A lot of people are afraid to tell the truth, to say no.
That’s where toughness comes into play.
Toughness is not being a bully.
It’s having backbone.
The law identifies cyberstalkers as those who repeatedly deliver unwanted, threatening and/or offensive communications to targeted individuals. The targets are often those who refuse to enter into an interpersonal relationship with the perpetrator or have ended a relationship with the perpetrator. It is a recognized crime in the United States, in Canada, and elsewhere.
In 1999, the first successful prosecution under California’s cyberstalking law took place. A former male security guard used the Internet to encourage others to behave in an actionable manner towards a female who rejected his romantic advances. The charges against the former security guard included one count of cyberstalking as well as three other charges. It was proven that the former security guard had terrorized his target which led others to harass and endanger her.
Two days ago, there was a news report about a woman who had committed vehicular assault against another woman because of an incident of Facebook. The woman who was assaulted had accepted a friend request from a man on Facebook. The woman who was charged had repeatedly requested that the same man “friend” her on Facebook and he had ignored her requests.
The first contact I had with Kevin Healey was on YouTube. Based on his behaviour, I felt threatened and refused to be drawn into any further communication with him. A few days later, Kevin Healey attempted on no fewer than 3 occasions to follow me on Twitter, knowing that I was the same “Elyse Bruce” from YouTube. I removed him from my list each time and finally blocked him. It was the early signs of cyberstalking. The definition of cyberstalking is “harassment generally comprised of repeated persistent following with no legitimate reason and with the intention of harming, or so as to arouse anxiety or fear of harm in the person being followed.”
I had written a blog entry on January 10, 2011 about the latest trend on social networking sites where people react negatively to having their friend requests ignored. As can be seen from the aforementioned story, refusing can be dangerous for the person ignoring the request and for those whose requests are accepted.
Based on the harassment I was experiencing from Kevin Healey — harassment being legally defined as “unjustifiable conduct, typically persistent and repetitive, aimed at an individual, that causes distress or discomfort” I wrote a second blog entry on January 20, 2011 about the next trend on social networking sites where people react negatively when an individual removes them from their list of followers. And yes, I identified Kevin Healey as the individual who was harassing me on social media networks. It was a fact and I had proof.
What’s more, in the 7 days that followed the blog entry on social networking trends, Kevin Healey visited the MIC blog site from just one of his multiple IP addresses no fewer than 120 times! When those visits are added to the other visits from Kevin Healey‘s other IP addresses, it is most definitely harassment and cyberstalking.
Kevin Healey, however, decided that he would act as if he had not harassed me and began a vendetta on social networking sites to defame me. The definition of defamation is “when words are published to a third person that tends to lower the plaintiff in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally or to expose him to hatred, contempt, or ridicule. To be actionable, the words must be reasonably understood by others in a defamatory sense.”
Since Kevin Healey‘s denial of his behaviour placed me in the position of having to prove that he had, indeed, harassed, cyberstalked and defamed me, I published screenshots, as is my legal right. In this way, people could view the activity for themselves, see the actual proof, and draw their own conclusions, rather than derive a summation from possibly specious tweets and chatter on the net from sources other than myself.
From there, Kevin Healey gathered around him a group of individuals who, with his knowledge and/or at his behest, continued the harassment and defamation via cyberstalking. The definition of cyberstalking is “to use the Internet to target a person whom one intends to criminally victimize.”
And so, this is how “Autism campaigner, Activist, Author, you tube film maker, Autism Blogger, Autism Charity Founder, Chairman” and self-professed “nice guy” Kevin Healey of Staffordshire Adults Autistic Society and Autism Radio UK behaves. Is this the kind of Autism Advocate individuals and families dealing with Autism Spectrum Disorders want representing them?
Let’s remember that even though I have repeatedly attempted to put a stop to these activities, the harassment, cyberstalking, defaming and cyberbullying has continued.
Founder and Creator
MIDNIGHT IN CHICAGO