"I'm pretty sure what Cernovich is doing is civil harassment in the state of California; and I feel badly about Quinn being harassed like this on my account." - idledillettante.
1. You are wrong. My conduct did not even close to the line of harassment in the state of California.
2. Nobody cares about how you feel.
Ms. idledillettante, your conduct is a criminal violation of Penal Code Section 148.5, which makes it a crime to file a false police report. I would suggest you retain a criminal defense attorney to help you withdraw your report to avoid criminal liability.
I do not have any control over what, if anything, the LAPD decides to do with you. I do, however, have the right to sue you. This is a right I intend to exercise.
The false police report you filed allows me to sue you for damages. What's more, you incited others to file false police reports, which itself opens you up to liability under entirely other theories.
You seem to think this is a joke, or that you may use the legal system to vindicate your feelings. You are in for a rude awakening. I suggest you print this out and go to your college's legal department immediately.
Ms. idledillettante falsely accused Mike Cernovich of harassment.
Ms. idledillettante reported me to the Los Angeles Police Department (and encouraged her readers to file false police reports).
What crime did I commit? In Ms. idledillettante's words, "I'm pretty sure what Cernovich is doing is civil harassment in the state of California."
As is turns out, California has a civil harassment statute. Anyone with an Internet connection can read it.
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 527.6 provides:
527.6. (a) (1) A person who has suffered harassment as defined in subdivision (b) may seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction prohibiting harassment as provided in this section.
There is, of course, an important caveat. CCP section 527.6(b)(1) reads: "Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of 'course of conduct.'"
Even if the First Amendment did not exist (God Bless America), none of my conduct would have remotely fallen under harassment under California law. Again, the law (not your feelings) provides:
"Course of conduct" is a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose, including following or stalking an individual, making harassing telephone calls to an individual, or sending harassing correspondence to an individual by any means, including, but not limited to, the use of public or private mails, interoffice mail, facsimile, or computer email.
I never followed, stalked, or made harassing calls to anyone. I write about whatever I want to write about. If people read what I write and dislike it, that is their fault.
You cannot actively seek out "offensive" or "harassing" material that hurts your feels and later claim that the person who wrote something you actively sought out harassed you. Well, you can claim that in your crybaby gender studies courses. You may not, however, make that claim in a court of law.
That said, even analyzing my conduct under the harassment statute is a red herring, as all of my conduct falls within well-defined protections of the First Amendment.
(Have you not noticed that there hasn't been a single licensed attorney who has accused me of any criminal or civil wrongdoing?)
It is impossible for me to harass anyone if I am engaged in constitutionally protective activity - such as exercising my rights under the First Amendment.
The police report.
Ms. idledillettante issues with my conduct stem from my blog post about Chelsea Van Valkenburg A/K/A Zoe Quinn.
I was well within my legal rights to write about a legal dispute. This is so obvious as to be baffling that anyone would contend otherwise. You can read all of the case citations here.
Ms. idledillettante became outraged that I wrote about Valkenburg's case and "doxxed" me.
Much of Ms. idledillettante's gripes concern conduct that is entirely lawful and appropraite. THe conduct is lawful as I have a First Amendment right to write about issues concerning the court system. The conduct is appropriate as Zoe Quinn doxxed me.
Ms. idledillettante posted my full address on her site. She also posted a Google street image view of my house. She coordianted her dooxing of me with Valkenburg.
Ms. idledillettante complained to police that:
- Mike Cernovich is a licensed attorney in CA. He became interested in a restraining order filed by the victim against her ex Eron Gjoni in MA. Gjoni harassed the victim via internet postings until ordered to stop by a court. Cernovich believes that filing a restraining order against Gjoni is an assualt on Eron’s rights & requested court documents from MA about the case. He then posted them on the internet to the prominent hate group #gamergate, who has been harassing the victim since late August.
This is true as to me, with the qualification that #GamerGate is not a hate group and that there is no evidence #GamerGate has been harassing Valkenburg (who is an alleged victim); no comment as to the truthfullness as to Mr. Gjoni.
I paid a courier service to obtain a copy of the restraining order Valkenburg obtained against Gjoni. The restraining order was a public record. I broke no laws. I obtained records anyone could obtain.
My conduct was entirely lawful. No reasonable person would believe otherwise.
- Attached to this complaint is the victim’s handwritten complaint which Cernovich posted on his blog on October 23rd. Here, he reacts to something I did (posting a Google Street View of his house) by calling out the victim repeatedly by her legal name, which was not widely known before.
I have the First Amendment right to call Zoe Quinn by her real name or alias. No reasonable person would believe otherwise.
- He has also been threatening on Twitter to hire a private investigator to research the victim . He has been repeating this story with the hashtag #gamergate, a poorly organized internet hate mob.
This is all true, except that #GamerGate is not a hate mob.
I did in fact hire a private investigator to look into Valkenburg and her boyfriend, Alex Lifschitz. I also hired the same private investigator to look into Ms. idledillettante.
Hiring a private investigator is entirely lawful. No reasonable person would believe otherwise.
The lies contained in the police report.
Ms. idledillettante did not merely report me for a non-crime. What she did was even worse. She lied about me in her police report.
Ms. idledillettante told the Los Angeles Police Department several lies, including:
- 1. "He has ... sent the victim [Valkenburg] threatening direct messages ."
Direct messages (or DMs) are a method of communication available by using Twitter.
I have never sent Valkenburg an email or DM. In fact, I do not even send @ Tweets to Ms. Valkenburg. If Ms. Valkenburg is bothered by what I write, it is because she actively reads me. I send her nothing.
- 2. He "seems convinced that the victim doxxed him when in fact she did not."
This is false. I have proof that Valkenburg and Ms. idledillettante acted together in doxxing me.
Ms. idledillettante has a big mouth and it wasn't hard confirming that she coordinated her doxx of me with Valkenburg.
The causes of action.
Get a lawyer, Ms. idledillettante.
He or she will walk you through the many causes of action I have against you. You may talk about defamation (both for your blog post and the police report), abuse of process, harassment (filing a false police report is not constitutionally protected), intentional infliction of emotional distress, and more.
Because you used the interstate wires to transmit your false police report, there may be federal causes of action there, too.
Again, please consult with a licensed attorney. Go to your university's General Counsel. Get help. You need it.
The lawsuit will be filed in California.
Ms. idledillettante is a student located outside of the State of California. She recently contacted the Los Angeles Police Department to file a false police report against me.
Since Ms. idledillettante contacted authorities in Los Angeles, jurisdiction in California State court would be proper. Ms. idledillettante will need to retain an attorney licensed to practice in the State of California.
This will be my last open letter.
Ms. idledillettante, the false police report you filed was beyond the pale of what I could have expected. I understand that people play dirty on the Internet. I did not anticipate that you would break the law. You reported conduct that wasn't criminal. You also lied.
As you have neglected to accept my generous offer that you apologize and move on, I have instructed my attorney to file suit.
We will likely wait until the holidays are over, as we are good guys.
Have a good day, Ms. idledillettante.