Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 6.7-7

Note: This instruction is for crimes committed on or after October 1, 2021. Public Act No.

21-56, § 5, substantially revised the definition of the offense. For crimes committed before

October 1, 2021, see Instruction 6.7-7 (archived).

The defendant is charged [in count___] with harassment in the second degree. The statute

defining this offense reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of harassment in the second degree when with intent to harass,

terrorize or alarm another person, and for no legitimate purpose, (he/she)

communicates or shares a photograph, video or words or engages in any other form of

communication to a digital, electronic, online or other meeting space, in a manner

likely to cause terror, intimidation or alarm.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements

beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Intent

The first element is that the defendant, for no legitimate purpose, intended to harass, terrorize or

alarm <identify complainant>. A person acts “intentionally” with respect to a result when

(his/her) conscious objective is to cause such result. <See Intent: Specific, Instruction 2.3-1>

“Harass” means to trouble, worry or torment. “Alarm” means to make suddenly afraid, anxious,

or frightened. “Terrorize” means to cause intense fear or apprehension.

1 “Legitimate” means in

accordance with established rules, principles, or standards.

Element 2 – Communicates or Shares

The second element the state must prove is that the defendant communicated or shared a

(photograph / video / words) or engaged in any other form of communication to a (digital /

electronic / online / <other type>) meeting space in a manner likely to cause terror, intimidation

or alarm.

[<Insert applicable definitions:>

• “Communicate” means communicate with another over the internet, including email,

instant messaging, feedback on blogs, contact forms on websites, industry forums, chat

rooms, and social networking sites.

• “Share” means to send a file or link to another person including but not limited to using

an application or website that enables users to send photos, documents, articles, or links

to another via email or to their social networking accounts.

• “Digital” means computer or internet activities.4

• “Online” means connected to a server in the public internet or a server in a private

network.

• A “server” is a computer system in a network that is shared by multiple users, and may

refer to both the hardware and the software related to a computer.5

• “Meeting place” means a virtual room set up online through a website host that allows

people from anywhere to “meet” with each other to share information and network in real

time. Meetings can take the form of instant-message chat, audio chat, or video chat that

allows participants to see each other through a web camera.

6]

[<If the allegations rely on the content of the communication:>

7 The second element is that the

defendant communicated or shared a (photograph / video / words) or engaged in any other form

of communication to a (digital / electronic / online / <other type>) meeting space during which

(he/she) made a threat to commit an unlawful act of violence. (See above definitions.) A threat

can only be punishable when it is a true threat. <See True Threats, Instruction 2.2-8.>]

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) with intent to harass,

terrorize or alarm <identify complainant> and for no legitimate purpose 2) the defendant

communicated or shared (a photograph / a video / words) or engaged in another form of

communication to a (digital / electronic / online / <other type>) meeting place (in a manner

likely to cause terror, intimidation, or alarm / during which (he/she) made a threat to commit an

unlawful act of violence).

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements

of the crime of harassment in the second degree, then you shall find the defendant guilty. On the

other hand, if you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt

any of the elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.

1 State v. Dyson, 238 Conn. 784, 798-99 (1996).

2 P.C. Magazine encyclopedia.

3 P.C. Magazine encyclopedia.

4 P.C. Magazine encyclopedia.

5 P.C. Magazine encyclopedia.

6 Work.chron.com.

7 If the allegations rely on the content of the communication, the content must qualify as a true

threat. State v. Moulton, 310 Conn. 337, 360 (2014).