Question

Do you think that the installation of stalker software on suspects’ cell phones should be authorized for law enforcement agencies? If so, under what circumstances should such use be permitted? If not, why not.

Notes:
answer by using your own words, please.
the name of the course is "Professional Computing Issues."

Answer 1

According to me, the installation of stalker software on suspects cell phone should not be authorized for law enforcement agencies as they are protecting the citizens and in technical term process is also known as cyberstalking. Cyberstalking shares important characteristics with offline stalking. Many stalkers - online or off - are motivated by a desire to control their victims. The majority of cyberstalkers are men and the majority of their victims are women, although there have been reported cases of women cyberstalking men and of same-sex cyberstalking. Since cyberstalking does not involve physical contact, some misperceive this criminal attempt as something much tamer and less threatening than physical stalking. This is not necessarily true. As the Internet becomes entwined with our personal and professional lives, stalkers can take advantage of the ease of communications as well as increased access to personal information. Given the enormous amount of personal information available through the Internet, a cyberstalker can easily locate private information about a potential victim with a few mouse clicks or keystrokes. Other things that pave the way for a cyberstalker are the often anonymous character of the Internet, and the practiced use of non-confrontational and impersonal communications. A potential stalker may be unwilling or unable to confront a victim in person or over the telephone, but he or she may have little hesitation about sending the victim harassing or threatening electronic communications. Finally, just as in physical stalking, online harassment and threats may be a prelude to physical violence or serious property damage. In that sense, they must all be taken seriously on the first report by the victim.

The outcome for a person victimized by cyberstalking may vary considerably depending on where the person lives and the cyber skills of the officers at the agency that the victim would report the stalking to.

In one case, a couple received numerous harassing phone calls after being stalked on the Internet, and reported the problem to the local police agency on numerous occasions. This particular agency advised the couple to change their home phone number. The couple next contacted the FBI, and the FBI investigation revealed that the local police agency did not have a computer expert, nor had the investigating officer ever been on the Internet. The local agency's lack of familiarity and resources may have resulted in a failure to understand the seriousness of the problem and the options available to law enforcement to respond to such problems.

This is not an isolated case. In fact, many local law enforcement agencies and their officers

do not have the training or expertise to recognize the magnitude of the problem in their jurisdictions.

Some state and local agencies also have been frustrated by jurisdictional limitations. In many instances, the cyberstalker may be located in a different city or state than the victim, making it more difficult (and, in some cases, all but impossible) for the local authority to investigate the incident. Even if a law enforcement agency is willing to pursue a case across state lines, it may be difficult to obtain assistance from out-of-state agencies when the conduct is limited to harassing e-mail messages and no actual violence has occurred. A number of cases have been referred to the FBI and U.S. Attorney's offices because the victim and suspect were located in different states and the local agency was not able to pursue the investigation.

The lack of adequate statutory authority also can limit law enforcement's response to cyberstalking incidents. At least 16 states have stalking statutes that explicitly cover electronic communications, and cyberstalking may be covered under general stalking statutes in other states. It may not, however, meet the statutory definition of stalking in the remainder. In many cases, cyberstalking will involve threats to kill, kidnap, or injure the person, reputation, or property of another, either on or offline and, as such, may be prosecuted under other federal or state laws that do not relate directly to stalking.

Finally, federal law may limit the ability of law enforcement agencies to track down stalkers and other criminals in cyberspace. In particular, the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 (CCPA) prohibits the disclosure of subscriber records to law enforcement agencies without a court order and advance notice to the subscriber (See 47 U.S.C. 551(c), (h)). As more and more people turn to cable companies for Internet services, the CCPA is posing a significant obstacle to the investigation of cybercrimes, including cyberstalking.

For example, under the CCPA, a law enforcement agency investigating a cyberstalker who uses a cable company for Internet access would have to provide the person notice that the agency has requested his or her subscriber records, thereby jeopardizing the criminal investigation. While it is appropriate to prohibit the indiscriminate disclosure of cable records to law enforcement agencies, the better approach would be to harmonize federal law by providing law enforcement access to cable subscriber records under the same privacy safeguards that currently govern law enforcement access to records of electronic mail subscribers under 18 U.S.C. 2703. In addition, special provisions could be drafted to protect against the inappropriate disclosure of records that would reveal a customer's viewing habits.

The laws against stalking

State laws that protect stalking victims

All states except Maine have enacted anti-stalking laws. California enacted the first anti-stalking statute in 1990, primarily in response to the public outcry over the stalking and subsequent murder of Rebecca Schaeffer, an actress appearing on the television sitcom, My Sister Sam. Many states have both criminal and civil anti-stalking laws.

Some online stalking statutes include Alaska's anti-stalking law, California's anti-stalking law, Penal Code Section 646.9, and Family Code Section 6320, Indiana's anti-stalking law, and West Virginia's anti-stalking law. The National Victim's Rights Center lists various other state statutes on stalking and victim's rights. Canada enacted a comprehensive anti-stalking law in 1993.

Federal laws that protect stalking victims

Currently, there are few federal laws that deal directly with stalking.

The Interstate Stalking Punishment and Prevention Act of 1996 punishes persons with a fine and/or imprisonment for crossing state lines "with the intent to injure or harass another person...or place that person in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury..." (18 USC § 2261A, 2261, 2262).

18 USC Section 875

The federal law on interstate communications reads:

     (a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing

     any demand or request for a ransom or reward for the release of any kidnapped person,

     shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

     (b) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any

     money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any

     communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the

     person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years,

     or both.

     (c) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing

     any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be

     fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

     (d) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any

     money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any

     communication containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the addressee

     or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or any threat to accuse the

   addressee or any other person of a crime, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not

     more than two years, or both.

Two laws authorize grants for law enforcement agencies to develop programs addressing stalking and for states to improve the process for entering stalking-related data into local, state and national crime information databases such as the National Crime Information Center. (42 USC §§ 3796gg, 14031)

Another law requires a training program for judges to ensure that when they issue orders in stalking cases, they have all the available criminal history and other information from state and federal sources. (42 USC § 14036)

The Drivers' Privacy Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. Chapter 123, Sections 2721 - 2725, prevents state motor vehicle departments from releasing personal information about any individual unless that department has permitted the individual an opportunity to opt out of disclosure.

42 U.S.C. Section 14038 requires the U.S. Attorney General to compile information about stalking as part of the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS).

Statutes that require a showing of a "credible threat" may be problematic in the prosecution of stalking. Stalkers often do not threaten their victims overtly or in person; rather, they engage in conduct that, when taken in context, would cause a reasonable person to fear violence.

In the context of cyberstalking, a credible threat requirement would be even more problematic because the stalker, sometimes without the victim knowing, may be located a great distance away and, therefore, the threat might not be considered credible. The better approach, codified in the federal interstate stalking statute, 18 U.S.C. 2261A, is to prohibit conduct that places a person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury.

Legislation to prohibit stalking via electronic mail has been introduced in Congress.