First Conviction Using California's Revenge Porn Law
from the for-one-horrible-ex-boyfriend dept
Just as Arizona’s anti-revenge porn law has been put on hold due to First Amendment concerns, California prosecutors have scored their first conviction under California’s recently enacted revenge porn law. The guy, Noe Iniguez, sounds particularly horrible:
Iniguez, using an alias, allegedly began posting derogatory comments about his ex-girlfriend on her employer?s Facebook page. In March, 2014 Iniguez allegedly posted a topless photograph of the victim on her employer?s Facebook page which was accompanied by a message that called the victim a ?drunk? and a ?slut? and encouraged her firing from the company.
The court gave him a year in jail. However, again, it appears that existing laws would have been perfectly fine for going after this guy. The reports say that he ignored two separate restraining orders and the jury had found him guilty of such. The revenge porn law just seems like a way of adding even more charges, and prosecutors recognize that, as the following statement came from LA City Attorney Mike Feuer:
California?s new revenge porn law gives prosecutors a valuable tool to protect victims whose lives and reputations have been upended by a person they once trusted. This conviction sends a strong message that this type of malicious behavior will not be tolerated.
There’s no doubt that the actions taken by Iniguez were horrible. I totally get the desire to put him away — but, again, it appears that existing laws were perfectly adequate in dealing with the situation. The problem is that these kinds of revenge porn laws open up the ability to potentially go after people for First Amendment protected speech, and that should be a serious concern.
Filed Under: california, mike feuer, noe iniguez, restraining order, revenge porn
Comments on “First Conviction Using California's Revenge Porn Law”
you dance around it but don’t mention the laws that are already in place that could have been used
Re: Re:
From paragraph 3:
It helps to read the article, sometimes.
Re: Re:
Re: Re:
IN addition to the violation of restraining orders, here are a couple more laws that it appears he violated: harassment (including sexual harassment), perhaps stalking, defamation, and libel, just off the top of my head.
California’s new revenge porn law gives prosecutors a valuable tool to protect victims whose lives and reputations have been upended by a person they once trusted.
It’s this idiotic mindset why we have too many stupid laws on the books.
Laws aren’t created to deter. They’re create to punish.
This victim, despite the law being on the books at the time of the crime, wasn’t protected because of the “law”.