WUWT commenter “The Duke” writes:
I just sent the following letter to Senator Joe Simitian (D- Palo Alto) regarding Dr. Gleick’s apparent violation of SB 1411 which went into effect January 1st, 2011.
Dear Senator Simitian:
I am writing to you regarding possible violations of the impersonations law (SB 1411) you authored and successfully guided through the California legislature into law. It appears that Bay Area Scientist Dr. Peter Gleick has violated the law you wrote by impersonating a member of the Board of Directors at the Heartland Institute in Chicago in order to obtain privileged information from that private organization. Mr. Gleick has confessed to violating the law in a column on the Huffington Post. Here is a link to that column:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/heartland-institute-documents_b_1289669.html
As SB 1411 is a new law and, as the violation of privacy is particularly egregious in this case, I think it important that it be vigorously enforced. Enforcement would also serve to educate the public about the illegality of impersonating a fellow citizen.
I have read that this is a law that needs to be enforced by local law enforcement officials. Although I do not know where Mr. Gleick lives, I am writing to you in hopes that you might use your influence to see that the law enforcement officials in the Bay Area city in which he lives are aware of his offense and will act accordingly.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
[theduke]
More info:
http://www.senatorsimitian.com/entry/sb_1411_criminal_e_personation/
Summary
Senate Bill 1411 would make it unlawful to knowingly and without consent credibly impersonate another person through or on an Internet Web site or by other electronic means with the intent to harm, intimidate, threaten or defraud another person.
Current law addressing false impersonation is outdated and was not drafted with the technologies of the 21st century in mind. SB 1411 brings us up to date by making these forms of cyber impersonation a punishable offense.
SB 1411 would add upon existing criminal penalties by providing a civil remedy, whereby anyone who suffers damage or loss as a victim of false impersonation perpetrated through the Internet or other electronic means may bring a civil action against the violator for compensatory damages and injunctive relief.
After this bill passed the Legislature, Senator Simitian sent a letter to the Governor urging his signature on this bill.
For more information, you can read the SB 1411 “Fact Sheet” prepared by a member of Senator Simitian’s staff.
California State Senate
SENATOR
S. JOSEPH SIMITIAN
ELEVENTH SENATE DISTRICT
DISTRICT OFFICE
160 Town & Country Village
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 688-6384
Fax (650) 688-6370
SATELLITE OFFICE
701 Ocean Street, Room 318A
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
(831) 425-0401
Fax (831) 425-5124
STATE CAPITOL
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916) 651-4011
Fax (916) 323-4529
Senator.Simitian@sen.ca.gov
WEBSITE
http://www.sen.ca.gov/simitian
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“a stern chase after a lie is a long one.”
Well, unintended consequences can be a b*tch.
However, it will depend on whether or not Governor Moonbeam signed it into law, so maybe Gleick is safe.
REPLY: It is actually law now, it has been signed – Anthony
Will see how vigorously this senator supports his won legislation when it’s one of their own breaking the law. Me thinks……not so much.
I read the link “letter to the govenor” and had a quiet chuckle (remember I’m down-under) – it was addressed “The Honorable Arnold Schwarzenegger” ……. I’ll be back !!!!
Sorrry, it may seem very logical to the US citizen to elect a b-movie “star” as a govenor – and in many respects it does I suppose – is there any significant difference in required qualities?
Excellent post – just enjoyed the ambience
A California Democrat going after Gleick? Love your optimism.
O. M. Gosh
Nice one. The cam on the scamshaft is approaching top-dead-centre. The more-savvy of the CAGW disciples are en route to Damascus. They are cognizant that a conversion, ahead of the stampede, will have first-mover advantage in future employment prospects and the “How I exposed the CAGW Scam” book deals.
Operation BACKPEDAL is happening. You will cough up a skeleton when Operation I NEVER REALLY MEANT THAT starts. Bring it on, and the fraud/conspiracy charges.
I’ve posted a few times that Gleick likely violated California Penal Code Section 528.5 which went into effect on Jan 1, 2011 (not 2012 as claimed in the post, see link in the post for confirmation). Here is the text of PC 528.5:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person
who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another
actual person through or on an Internet Web site or by other
electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening,
or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable
pursuant to subdivision (d).
(b) For purposes of this section, an impersonation is credible if
another person would reasonably believe, or did reasonably believe,
that the defendant was or is the person who was impersonated.
(c) For purposes of this section, “electronic means” shall include
opening an e-mail account or an account or profile on a social
networking Internet Web site in another person’s name.
(d) A violation of subdivision (a) is punishable by a fine not
exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a
county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and
imprisonment.
(e) In addition to any other civil remedy available, a person who
suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of subdivision (a)
may bring a civil action against the violator for compensatory
damages and injunctive relief or other equitable relief pursuant to
paragraphs (1), (2), (4), and (5) of subdivision (e) and subdivision
(g) of Section 502.
(f) This section shall not preclude prosecution under any other
law.
Subsection C makes it clear that creating an email account in someone else’s name is a violation when used to defraud or impersonate another person.
REPLY: year fixed, thanks – Anthony
let every possible punishment rain down on his sorry, stupid, liberal head.
Does a telephone call count as “other electronic means” or does this bill specifically and only target internet usage?
Because Peter Gleick, from what we have been told, used the telephone to call Heartland.
I think the bill is about cyber impersonation.
OTOH, Gleick impersonated a board member of Heartland when he drafted the fake memo. That memo, without question, was used with the intent to defraud and it was sent via the internet. So perhaps this law does apply after all.
Any lawyers here care to comment?
These laws are for thee, not for we the elite.
aaahhhh! So nice!
When I see these kinds of threads on WUWT I don’t read them immediately.
Instead I maximize the window and then go off and make a nice mug of hot tea. As it is brewing I find a couple of biscuits and put them on a little plate. I add a nice dollop of milk and then head back to the computer, settle back into my comfy chair and slowly read and cherish the little gems…
oh my, oh my…. this new law seems to be made for Gleickgate but will Calif. CAGWarmists allow prosecution? Can they permit their own pet law to be subverted? Such decisions….
p.s. Tweet of the day from Lucia quoting comment at TAV:
lucia liljegren @lucialiljegren
Comment at TAV: I would love to discuss the finer points of Mannian mathmagic sometime, but Gleick has just crashed the Hindenburg.
Looks pretty real to me. Here is a link to what appears to be the official California laws website. Penal Code 528.5 is the Simitian SB1411. What puzzles me is the effective date –it has been on the books for over a year? If so, it makes Gleick’s activity appear even more reckless; if that’s possible. Whoever suffers damage or loss from the impersonation would have standing to seek compensation from the impersonator. Who is injured here? Heartland may not be the only one…
http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_1401-1450/sb_1411_bill_20100927_chaptered.html
Why would they enforce the law this time? After all, Gleick meant well. Right? Aw, give the guy a break since he was working for the Team. Yeah, right.
Ah, but wait till some bad ol’ skeptic maybe does something a littly off….
There was another story today about two idiots who stole a $385 ice sculpture. They are going to be prosecuted for, get this, FELONY larceny. Stealing ice? Is everything a felony? Well, maybe not. I believe you can legally crack someone over the head if you are a member of a union on strike.
SB 1411 became section 528.5 of the California Penal Code and it went into effect on January 1, 2011 not 2012 as stated in the post.
I’ve posted the text of the section a couple of times in threads here and over at Lucia’s.
Great idea, in principle. But the rules are for us, not them. I doubt it will be enforced. It’s the same story with Obama and his “birth certificate”. The guy was due in court, didn’t show up and got off Scott free. Typical.
Just wondering…… What Gleick has done, as I understand it, clearly in violation of federal law(it went beyond state lines-crime), and now I see that it is also in violation of state law.
Let me guess ….. the justice dept. will get to that just as soon as they finish up with the serial dead people voting often and early thing…… that would be right before Cali collars him for this obvious and blatant crime.
Honestly, I thought of phoning the FBI in cali, but then I realized that nothing would come of it. Call me cynical, but I’ve seen how both roll. Peter Gleick considered himself above the law, and so does the law. An arrest should have been made as soon as Gleick’s confession hit HuffPo…. how long has it been? They’re prolly collecting evidence and whatnot. I believe it’s called, “impunity”.
Well someone had better inform the Editors at “Nature” because they seem confident that a tiny verbal slap on the wrist will be enough to make this all go away:
Editorial in “Nature”
FBI contacted:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets/2012/02/fbi-called-over-climate-change-mole/305161
Since he already confessed, the FBI should take this one. Not exactly a whole lot of difficult work to catch the perpetrator.
PS Gleick’s attorney:
http://www.kvn.com/Lawyers/Keker-John
Noted San Francisco criminal defense lawyer.
Here’s the news story from Dec. 22, 2010:
http://sfappeal.com/news/2010/12/online-impersonation-law-goes-into-effect-jan-1.php
I hope this goes somewhere, but… When you consider how many millions have been spent trying to prosecute high profile athletes it quickly becomes apparent that prosecutors are much more interested in cases that can get them on television than in prosecuting cases that redress evil. Nobody cares who stuck which needle full of which substance into their gluteus. This ‘look at me’ kind of rot goes all the way through the system from city, to county, to state, to federal attorneys. No more breath holding folks. But on the other hand we shouldn’t give up all hope that right will prevail and wrong will be punished.
Maybe the way to put this in perspective is to consider how far the ball has moved in just the last eighteen months. For american football fans it was fourth and twenty seven on our own ten yard line not so very long ago. (For everyone else that describes a nearly impossible situation.) Now it’s more like first and ten on our own thirty. Keep going Captain Anthony!
Where Gleick lives could be a problem. From the line above:
If Gleick lives in Berkeley, there could be a problem. Or Oakland, for that matter.
Bill Jamison: I was not aware of your posts on this subject. I did a google on “Impersonation California Law” today and found the link to sfappeal.com above.