Man Served Restraining Order Via Facebook

schliz writes "An Australian man has been served a restraining order via Facebook, after unsuccessful attempts by police to reach him by phone and in person. The man was a 'prolific Facebook user' who had allegedly threatened, bullied and harassed a former partner online. He was served both interim and final intervention orders by Facebook, after a local magistrate upheld the interim order indefinitely."

Thank for you the info-graphic

[Lord Byron II]

Now, I know what a restraining order looks like!

Re:

[eugene ts wong]

That picture reminds me of origami for beginners.

I always thought that a restraining order would have a lot more legal text. I guess not. :^)

Re:

[Sponge Bath]

I thought an Australian restraining order would include a dingo graphic.

"Man Served Restraining Order To Facebook"

[circletimessquare]

there, much more satisfying subject matter

Re:

[PsyciatricHelp]

I would like to reject all messages from this application.

Re:

[Ogive17]

Give them SOME credit. I'm sure they didn't just search for the guys' name and send a message to the first result.

Re:Good luck with that.

[drinkypoo]

Usually the person that serves the subpoena doesn't know the person being served. The profile picture and semi-private info on someone's profile shouldn't be enough to hold up in court.

I Must Be New Here, but if you Read The Fine Summary you will see that the man was being served a restraining order for his activities on facebook. It hardly matters what his real name is, since clearly you can serve the restraining order to the individual in question. If the name on the order doesn't match the person's real name, but does match their facebook account, then it's sufficient to drag them into court if they violate it, and then issue a new one (and perhaps some new charges, not least violation of the order) with the subject's real name attached.

See, laws are enforced in the real world, where we have ways around this sort of thing, not in an imaginary castle of perfect logic...

Try reading the summary in the future. It might help you. Then again, it might not. I could bet either way.

Re:

[TheLink]

Yeah I'm sure most judges won't be very impressed or convinced with the typical Slashdot Pedant's attempts of weaseling out via "perfect logic".

Those pedants are like those nerdy kids who have "figured out game rules" but haven't figured out why nobody wants to play with them.

Re:

[Culture20]

Yeah I'm sure most judges won't be very impressed or convinced with the typical Slashdot Pedant's attempts of weaseling out via "perfect logic". Those pedants are like those nerdy kids who have "figured out game rules" but haven't figured out why nobody wants to play with them.

I still like to play AD&D 2nd edition because fighters who specialize in throwing darts can do incredible damage at first level (4x(1d3+[str bonus]) per round)

Re:

[drinkypoo]

You were so on topic, the moderator who modded you has been sent to the fifth material plane of fail.

Fuck moderation: you're cool.

Re:

[Lumpy]

Exactly.

Here in the real world the Judges and Police happily trample a persons right and due process to do whatever the hell they want.

In Auzzie land it must be very lax for legal documents. Here in the USA you must be served the real paperwork. Although some scumbag judges and dirty cops like to skirt the law and do whatever it takes.

For Example: Emanuel Goldstein was served papers while he was out of the state. they knocked on his door, someone else answered and they literally THREW the papers through

Re:

[socsoc]

The summary says that he's a Facebook user and an online bully. It does not say that he bullied people on Facebook.

Try reading the summary in the future. It might help you. Then again, it might not. I could bet either way.

Re:

[tsalmark]

Idle, the equivalent of the Celebrity Gossip Section for geeks. You know you shouldn't click on the links but do anyway.

This is nothing spectacular

[clone53421]

We’re talking about Australia, where back in 2008 a couple was served with a lawsuit via facebook under similar circumstances [loweringthebar.net].

Really, though, serving a restraining order via facebook actually makes a bit more sense than the lawsuit even did... if the bullying is occurring via facebook, the person being harassed might not even know who the bully is, but if the court is able to legally order the bully to quit, it makes sense to do so via facebook.

May I be the first to say...

[Spent2HrOnAName]

Facebook claims to take users' privacy "very seriously"

Ahahaha. Aha. Haha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

All the finest minds

[Ubiquitous Bubba]

If I read this correctly, the reason for serving the restraining order via Facebook was due to the fact that the police had been unable to contact the individual by phone or in person. And yet, the message stated that attempts to violate this order would result in the perp being arrested. How does that work? "Ok. He's violated the Facebook Restraining Order. Go arrest him." "How? We couldn't find him. That's why we had to serve him on Facebook." "Uhh. We could put out a hit on him in MafiaWars." "Ri

Re:

[BStroms]

I'm no expert on US law, much less Australian, but I believe that if someone doesn't answer their door when the police knock to give a restraining order, there's nothing they can do. With an arrest warrant, they could force their way into the building. I know I never answer my door unless I'm expecting someone. Too many solicitors/Jehova's Witnesses to bother with that.

Click Here to Link

[bradorsomething]

Your Ex Girlfriend likes this.

Yawn. Service by publication. Nothing to see.

[Rene S. Hollan]

How is this nothing more than "service by publication", common when an individual can't be served the usual way?

Oh! I see. It is because it uses the shiny new interweb.

seems to be getting more common

[nanamin]

I was arrested 3 years ago because my roommate had drugs in the dorm room. Three years after being found not guilty, the police contacted me via Facebook to inform me that they wanted to return the evidence they seized from me, including nearly $500 in cash. After calling the officer who contacted me, I was mailed a check for the amount. Pretty interesting stuff, although if someone had made a fake Facebook profile under my name, they might be the one with the money...

Problem

[tru3ntropy]

If they can't find the guy to serve the restraining order how are they going to arrest him after subsequent breaches of the order?