Dr. Peter Gleick may have run afoul of a new cyber-impersonation law in California

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Current law addressing false impersonation is outdated and was not drafted with the technologies of the 21st century in mind.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

E-MAIL

Senator.Simitian@sen.ca.gov

WEBSITE

http://www.sen.ca.gov/simitian

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

107 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Garry
February 24, 2012 4:52 am

California Penal Code 484 – Fraudulent Taking
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/484.html
Every person who shall feloniously steal, take, carry,
lead, or drive away the personal property of another, or who shall fraudulently appropriate property which has been entrusted to him or her, or who shall knowingly and designedly, by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense, defraud any other person of money, labor or real or personal property [more at link above]
California Penal Code 530 – Impersonation
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/530.html
Every person who falsely personates another, in either his private or official capacity, and in such assumed character receives any money or property, knowing that it is intended to be delivered to the individual so personated, with intent to convert the same to his
own use, or to that of another person, or to deprive the true owner thereof, is punishable in the same manner and to the same extent as for larceny of the money or property so received.
California Penal Code 530.5 PC – Identity Theft
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/530.5.html
Every person who willfully obtains personal identifying
information, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 530.55, of another person, and uses that information for any unlawful purpose, including to obtain, or attempt to obtain, credit, goods, services, real property, or medical information without the consent of that
person, is guilty of a public offense, and upon conviction therefor, shall be punished by a fine, by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both a fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison.

Ian W
February 24, 2012 4:58 am

Thomas says:
February 24, 2012 at 3:37 am
From the text of the law: “for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable pursuant to subdivision”
Who is the person being harmed? As written this law only seems to protects people, not organizations like Heartland Institute.

The people who had their private donations made public and who are even now being harried by Green’peace’ and others. These are the persons being harmed.

J.H.
February 24, 2012 5:10 am

Ian W says:
February 24, 2012 at 3:25 am
Said Gleick’s lawyer John Keker, “Heartland no doubt will seek to exploit Dr. Gleick’s admitted lapse in judgement in order to further its agenda in the ongoing debate about climate change, but if it wants to pursue this matter legally, it will learn that our legal system provides for a level playing field.” Keker added, “Dr. Gleick looks forward to using discovery to understand more about the veracity of the documents, lay bare the implications of Heartland’s propaganda plans and, in particular, determine once and for all who is truly behind Heartland and why.”
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
So Keker is the Lawyer of great renown come to save Gleick’s fraudulent skin…. Well he certainly own goaled right at the kick off with that dumb statement…… Damages just doubled.

CodeTech
February 24, 2012 5:24 am

MikeH, I’m in favor of global warming.
The record shows that a warmer Earth is a more productive Earth, better able to grow food to feed the people, with more precipitation providing clean drinking water and fewer violent storms due to less dramatic temperature differences. Also I live in Canada and would be more than happy to never experience -40 again…
It actually makes me sad that the whole thing is a load of crap. I hate winter.

Jimbo
February 24, 2012 5:34 am

Gixxerboy says:
February 23, 2012 at 8:31 pm
A California Democrat going after Gleick? Love your optimism.

Can’t “The Duke” report this violation directly to the police? Won’t they then be compelled to act?
You guys in the USA need to file reports now. Gleick admitted on Huffington to have broken the law!!!! Come on!!!

Garry
February 24, 2012 5:43 am

Here’s a link to Tom Nelson’s blog for more info about Gleick and his lawyer John Keker:
http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/02/meet-criminal-defense-attorney-who.html

Jeff Evans
February 24, 2012 5:48 am

Pardon me, but read the text:
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.
This means, at least as I understand it, that the Heartland Institute could sue for damages, in civil court. That’s a whole different ballgame than persuading someone to prosecute Gleick, and it’s also a whole different ballgame in the legal burden of proof needed. Anyone recall OJ?

Luther Wu
February 24, 2012 6:04 am

Unicorns, winged Furies and blind Justice…

Paul Coppin
February 24, 2012 6:11 am

“Joshua corning says:
February 23, 2012 at 11:31 pm
What a stupid law.
I’m no fan of the fraud Gleick but prisons are filled already with too may non-violent offenders.
Go after him in civil court and the court of public opinion. Don’t waste tax payer money when it can be used to prosecute rapists, thugs and murders on this horse crap.”

Always amusing to read this progressive crap that white-collar crime is inoffensive. A murderer or rapist may destroy the lives of a few. A white-collar criminal has the ability the destroy the lives of thousands

Anton
February 24, 2012 6:28 am

Moderator, when I scroll down the left side of the page using the scroll bar, the entire page vanishes, and does not return until I’ve either hit the back button or re-entered the URL. This happens constantly, and has been going on for many days now.
Also, trying to write messages in the “Leave a Reply” field is difficult. I have to click on it many, many time, with the cursor in the lower right corner, till, finally, a blinking dash in the field’s upper left corner indicates that I can start writing. I’m using Internet Explorer 8 and MSN Explorer.
[Reply: Is anyone else having this problem? ~dbs, mod.]

TomB
February 24, 2012 6:30 am

Joshua corning says:
February 23, 2012 at 11:31 pm
What a stupid law.
I’m no fan of the fraud Gleick but prisons are filled already with too may non-violent offenders.

The law has provision for prison time, but that would be highly unlikely in this case. I assume a fine would be levied – and I’m fine with that. That’s presuming prosecution was pursued at all, which (like the majority of commenters) I highly doubt.

More Soylent Green!
February 24, 2012 6:40 am

Make no mistake about it, the good Dr. Gleick broke both criminal and civil laws at the state and federal level and I don’t imagine the Heartland Institute is going to take it easy on him. (And they should stick it to him and he deserves it, IMO.)
Does anybody with a legal background know about the potential liability of the Pacific Institute, it’s officers and directors?

February 24, 2012 6:44 am

Kozlowski asked (February 23, 2012 at 8:43 pm)
“…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…”
True, he may have made a phone call to start the fraud, but any documents he requested wouldn’t have been sent over the phone – thus the need to create an email account, using a name that would have been believable to the staffer.
THAT’S how he got the real docs. It’s still up in the air as to whether or not he created the “confidential memo”.
The thing that’s burning me is the fact that other blogs are using the “stolen” emails as a counter-arguement. Here, we’ve got an admission of mail fraud, and on the other hand, after this many years, still no CONCRETE proof that the ClimateGate emails WERE stolen.

Steve Keohane
February 24, 2012 7:05 am

[Reply: Is anyone else having this problem? ~dbs, mod.] I only have trouble with the main page, not the comments, where Watts Up With That?
Theme: Twenty Ten Blog at WordPress.com.
become overlaid at the bottom of the screen, see my screencap in tips & notes from ~ week ago. When this occurs, either the main page will not load completely, or all pages load. In either case there is no access to older/newer posts. I’m using Firefox 10.0.2

DirkH
February 24, 2012 7:05 am

Anton says:
February 24, 2012 at 6:28 am
“Moderator, when I scroll down the left side of the page using the scroll bar, the entire page vanishes, and does not return until I’ve either hit the back button or re-entered the URL. This happens constantly, and has been going on for many days now.”
I have that with Firefox on the main WUWT page sometimes. also for the past few days. Feels like some wicked JavaScript, but haven’t analyzed further.
“Also, trying to write messages in the “Leave a Reply” field is difficult. I have to click on it many, many time, with the cursor in the lower right corner, till, finally, a blinking dash in the field’s upper left corner indicates that I can start writing. I’m using Internet Explorer 8 and MSN Explorer.”
Happens with long threads. Workaround: Type your reply in a notepad or other editor window, when done, copy&paste your text into the wordpress box as a whole. Just click into the wordpress box, press ctrl v for paste without waiting for the cursor to appear. Again, seems to be a JavaScript that gets very slow when the thread is long.
HTH

DirkH
February 24, 2012 7:09 am

Ian W says:
February 24, 2012 at 4:58 am
“Thomas says:
February 24, 2012 at 3:37 am
From the text of the law: “for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable pursuant to subdivision”
Who is the person being harmed? As written this law only seems to protects people, not organizations like Heartland Institute.
The people who had their private donations made public and who are even now being harried by Green’peace’ and others. These are the persons being harmed.”
Don’t forget the scientists who receive money from HI. The Greens try to whip up a propaganda campaign, they want only CO2AGW governments to fund scientists; nobody else should be allowed to. Oh, and they’d love to neutralize those scientists completely by getting them out of academia. The Greens are on an annihilation campaign; I hope it backfires severely on them.

Alex the skeptic
February 24, 2012 7:10 am

All scientists are equal, but some are more equal than others and if these ‘more equal scientists’ were to break the law then nothing happens to them, but if, on the other hand, some less-equal scirentist were to poke his nose inside the rotten books of the ‘more-equal’ ones, then all the laws of the land would of course apply.

Alex the skeptic
February 24, 2012 7:15 am

The British police raided Tallbloke’s house and took awa his computers on some stupid excuse or other connected to the Climategate 2 revelations while Obama’s olice issued some notice to WordPress on the same excuse.
I expect that the US lawmakers will come down like a ton of bricks on Gleick for his criminal act. But then, some scientists may be more equal than others…………even in front of the law. We’ll wait and see.

More Soylent Green!
February 24, 2012 7:26 am

Alex the skeptic says:
February 24, 2012 at 7:15 am
The British police raided Tallbloke’s house and took awa his computers on some stupid excuse or other connected to the Climategate 2 revelations while Obama’s olice issued some notice to WordPress on the same excuse.
I expect that the US lawmakers will come down like a ton of bricks on Gleick for his criminal act. But then, some scientists may be more equal than others…………even in front of the law. We’ll wait and see.

Are there any countries with strong privacy laws where a site could be posted and keep the owner free from that sort of harassment TallBloke suffered?

February 24, 2012 7:26 am

MikeH says:
February 24, 2012 at 12:07 am
From a link previously noted above:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets/2012/02/fbi-called-over-climate-change-mole/305161

Heartland officials tell Washington Secrets that they have been in talks with the FBI over the case against prominent global warming proponent Peter Gleick, co-founder of the respected Pacific Institute.

Now, I’m not an expert on the English language (but I’ll play on on the net), doesn’t that sentence state he is in favor of global warming? It just shows how clueless the national media is on the subject, or they just don’t know how to write. Could Peter Gleick consider that slander? That fact is, none of us are Proponents of global warming (unless you were in Eastern Europe this winter), there is a difference on the cause and if humans can effect change.

I beg to differ. I like warming, whether global or not. The mild winter we have had here in eastern Massachusetts has been a blessing, especially after the piles of snow last year.
Good catch on the unintentional twist of “global warming proponent,” though. It’s of course shorthand for “CAGW acolyte.” Compare Dr. Gleick’s (and others of his ilk’s) use of the oxymoronic “anti-climate.”
/Mr Lynn

theduke
February 24, 2012 7:41 am

Joshua corning says:
February 23, 2012 at 11:31 pm
What a stupid law.
I’m no fan of the fraud Gleick but prisons are filled already with too may non-violent offenders.
Go after him in civil court and the court of public opinion. Don’t waste tax payer money when it can be used to prosecute rapists, thugs and murders on this horse crap.

Obviously written by someone who never had his identity stolen. Or private information released publicly or used illegally. The Constitution says “the right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . .” and while that only prohibits the government from such depredations, it is the basis for all laws against this kind of activity that are on the books.
What Gleick wants is precisely what you want to give him: no jail time and to have all his green friends around the world pay for any civil liabilities he may have incurred. It means he will get off scot-free and live the life of a hero among his friends. He wants to turn his crimes into a stage for political theatre. If you read his lawyer’s statement, you can see that is where this is going.
The laws need to have teeth or else society will devolve into anarchy. There should be no special dispensations for Gleick because he was acting on behalf of a noble cause.

Alex the skeptic
February 24, 2012 7:41 am

The warmists accuse us of being climate-change deniers, which we are not. It is them that deny climate change. We skeptics accept the scientifically proven fact that climate is always changing due to naturally-changing forces. We skeptics are not climate-change deniers, but actually proponents of climate-change, natural climate change.
On the other hand, the AGW church wants our governments to tax us people so that the planets temperature would stay steady for ever, denying us and our descendants from natural climate change. It is people like Gleick who are actually climate-change deniers.
It is time that we should start addressing the AGW church leaders as climate-change deniers because they want to deny us and our children of naturally-occurring climate change.

TomB
February 24, 2012 7:43 am

Ian H says:
February 24, 2012 at 12:32 am
“… harm intimidate threaten or defraud …”
intimidate – no ; threaten – no
defraud … arguable but quite a stretch.
harm – yes you could argue this. Harm is a very broad word.
However personally I would prefer NOT to see this particular law applied to this case.<blockquote
I love to quote Arnold J. Rimmer, "Wrong, wrong, absolutely brimming over with wrongability!" Intimidate – yes, since the personal information of donors has now been exposed and Heartland specifically stated in their press release that these individuals and organizations are now in fear of senseless violence, for good reason.
Threaten – yes, the implicit intimidation also implies a threat. Again, the Heartland press release mentions this very real threat. And rightly so.
Defraud – no, as defraud implies a theft of money.
Harm – yes, as the reputation of the institution has been impugned with a possible negative effect on future fund raising and bearing the cost of future security measures.

Firstly there is seldom any need for them. Intimidating, threatening, defrauding and harming others are already criminal offenses without this law. So why was there a need for a specific law with extra serious penalties for doing these things with the help of a computer. See what I mean?

Again, you’re wrong. This, and laws like it, have been written and passed in response to specific requests from State and Federal Attorneys General who have stated over and over again that existing law does not provide sufficient grounds for pursuing prosecution. These laws fill a dangerous gap in existing legislation.

Laws like this are written for no better reason than to make a politician look good. Not much real thought went into them. They are frequently shockingly poorly drafted – excessively punitive and dangerously vague. There is often huge potential for them to be abused.

Wrong again, as addressed above. I’m actually quite pleased with how this law has been written. It is very short, succinct, to the point and in no way “dangerously vague”. That’s very uncommon. I also fail to see how a maximum penalty of a measly $1,000 fine and/or 1 year county jail time can be described as “excessively punitive”. Given how damaging such electronic impersonation could be, the penalties that attach seem to be very light.
Overall, I agree with your EFF based sentiment as I am in general agreement with the EFF. I just disagree with your analysis as it applies to this specific statute.
I still think a civil remedy is the way to go. It appears Peter Gleick (or his attorney anyway) are all but salivating in anticipation of the discovery request they plan to put forward to the Heartland Institute in that event (see the Examiner article linked above). Methinks they might be disappointed. Even in Kalifornia most judges won’t allow them to use this as a fishing expedition. And it wouldn’t be tried in Kalifornia anyway but in Illinois (Ok, maybe not much better – but a little). And discovery goes both ways. What if the Pacific Institute, the American Geophysical Union, the National Academy of Sciences were served a subpoena duces tecum for documents and depositions? I believe a very strong case for requesting documents from these organizations could be made. Not gonna make Gleick any more popular with those organizations, will it?

Henry chance
February 24, 2012 7:56 am

Peter was given the invitation to speak. He submitted a request for the names of donors. At that point it becomes intent and personal. Why would he need donor names?
Peter will not want to face a jury in criminal court.

Mike M
February 24, 2012 7:56 am

Josh take note, I think we’ve got a new poster idea for you.

Verified by MonsterInsights