Federal Judge Dismisses Twitter Stalking Case

Federal judge Rodger W. Titus recently dismissed a case against a man accused of stalking a religious leader on Twitter. In his 27-page ruling he stated that his speech, though "uncomfortable," is protected by the Constitution.

Buddhist leader Alyce Zeoli accused William Lawrence Cassidy of harassing her and inflicting "substantial emotional distress". Cassidy was involved with Zeoli and her sect until they had a falling out. In 2010, Cassidy started posting hundreds of harassing messages directed at Zeoli via Twitter and a blog hosted on Blogspot.

The tweets consisted of statements such as: "Do the world a favor and go kill yourself. P.S. Have a nice day." According to Zeoli, the tweets not only inflicted "substantial emotional distress", but also madder her fear for her safety. She claimed that she hadn't left her house for 18 months, except to visit her psychiatrist.

Judge Rodger W. Titus ruled in Cassidy's favor, opining that Twitter is different from other communication mediums like phone calls or emails because a person can ignore items posted on Twitter. In his 27-page ruling, he compared Twitter to the bulletin boards colonial-era citizens used to erect in their front yards. The difference is that Twitter exists online, he said.

"If one colonist wants to see what is on another's bulletin board, he would need to walk over to his neighbor's yard and look at what is posted… Now one can inspect a neighbor's blog by simply turning on a computer," Titus ruled, stating that one colonist can choose to look at a board or ignore it completely.

He continued: "Twitter and blogs are today's equivalent of a bulletin board that one is free to disregard, in contrast, for example, to e-mails or phone calls directed to a victim." Because Zeoli had this option, Cassidy's speech is protected.

The judge also ruled that because some of Cassidy's messages were critical of Zeoli's religious beliefs, his speech is protected by the First Amendment.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation applauded Titus's decision.

"Speech on social networking sites–as with speech anywhere–has the potential to inform and enlighten as well as to outrage," senior staff attorney Matt Zimmerman said. "It is imperative that courts recognize and uphold First Amendment protections in order to give all manner of expression sufficient breathing space to thrive online."

It's unclear whether Zeoli will appeal.