SELECTED CASE LAW
In 2017 BCPC 118, Ms. S testified that she met Mr. O online through mutual Facebook friends. She claimed she never had any personal contact with him, but Mr. O said they had met in the past when they were teens. On several occasions, Mr. O transferred money to Ms. S as a gift without her asking. After some time, Ms. S no longer wanted to communicate with Mr. O be-cause she thought he was a “weirdo”, but her persisted in communicating with her after she asked him to leave her alone. He would initiate many Facebook messages in rapid succession, which Ms. S would not respond to. Ms. S tried blocking and deleting him on social media, but he continued to text her. His communication escalated to threats and vile language. She contacted the police, who contacted Mr. O to tell him that his communication was unwanted and that he should stop contacting Ms. S. This warning did not deter Mr. O, who kept communicating with Ms. S and her two daughters who were 17 and 20-21.
Mr. O was found guilty of repeated harassing communication by means of telecommunication based on the Facebook messages.
At trial Ms. S asked for testimonial accommodation and was allowed to testify via CCTV in an-other room.
Also see: 2016 BCPC 362 (Pre-trial – accommodation)
Criminal Offence(s): Harassing Communications