Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 6.7-8

The defendant is charged [in count___] with electronic stalking. The statute defining this

offense reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of electronic stalking when such person with the intent to kill,

injure, harass or intimidate, uses any (interactive computer service / electronic

communication service / electronic communication system / electronic monitoring

system) to place another person under surveillance or otherwise to engage in a course

of conduct that places such other person in reasonable fear of the death of or serious

bodily injury to (such person / an immediate family member of such person / an

intimate partner of such person).

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 intended to (kill / injure / harass / intimidate) <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.>

“Kill” means to deprive of life in any manner. “Injure” means to cause impairment of physical

condition or pain. “Harass” means to trouble, worry, or torment. “Intimidate” means to force

into or deter from some action by inducing fear.

Element 2 - Use of Computer/Electronic Service/System

The second element is that the defendant used any (interactive computer service / electronic

communication service / electronic communication system / electronic monitoring system) for a

purpose to be explained in a moment.

[<Insert applicable definitions:>

• “Interactive computer service” means any information service, system or access software

provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server,

including a service or system that provides access to the internet.

• “Electronic communication service” means any service which provides to users thereof

the ability to send or receive wire or electronic communications.2

• “Electronic communication system” means any computer facilities or related electronic

equipment for the electronic storage of electronic communications.3

• “Electronic monitoring system” means any electronic device or apparatus which can be

used to intercept, monitor, or collect a wire, oral, or electronic communication.4]

Element 3 - Fear of Death/Serious Bodily Injury

If you find it proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant used any (interactive

computer service / electronic communication service / electronic communication system /

electronic monitoring system), you must then determine whether (he/she) used such (service /

system) to place <identify complainant> under surveillance or otherwise to engage in a course of

conduct that placed <identify complainant> in reasonable fear of (his/her) death or serious bodily

injury or that of (his/her) immediate family member or intimate partner.

[<Insert applicable definitions:>

• To place under “surveillance” means to closely watch or carefully observe a person.5

• “Course of conduct” means two or more acts, including, but not limited to, acts in which

a person directly, indirectly, or through a third party, by any action, method, device or

means, including, but not limited to, electronic or social media, monitors, surveils,

harasses, or communicates about or with a person.6

• “Immediate family member” means a spouse, parent, brother, sister, or child of <identify

complainant>, or a person for whom <identify complainant> acts as a parent, or any

person living in <identify complainant>’s household and related to (him/her) by blood or

marriage.7

• “Intimate partner” means <identify complainant>’s former spouse, a person who has a

child in common with <identify complainant>, regardless of whether they are or have

been married, or are living or have lived together at any time, or a person who is in, or

has recently been in, a dating relationship with <identify complainant>.8

• “Serious bodily injury” means “physical injury which creates a substantial risk of death,

or which causes serious disfigurement, serious impairment of health or serious loss or

impairment of the function of any bodily organ.”

9]

Determining whether <identify complainant> reasonably feared ((his/her) / <another person’s>)

death or serious bodily injury requires a two-step process. First, the evidence must be viewed

from the standpoint of <identify complainant>. Did (he/she) in fact fear <insert as applicable>

((his/her) death or serious bodily injury / the death or serious bodily injury of an immediate

family member / the death or serious bodily injury of an intimate partner)? If the answer to that

question is no, you must find the defendant not guilty. If the answer to that question is yes, you

must then ask whether <identify complainant>’s fear was reasonable. You must answer that

question from the standpoint of a reasonable person at the time in question. You must ask

yourself whether under all the circumstances then present, was the fear of (the death of / serious

bodily injury to) ((himself/herself) / an immediate family member / an intimate partner)

reasonable?

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1) the

defendant, acting with the intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate 2) used any (interactive

computer service / electronic communication service / electronic communication system /

electronic monitoring system) 3) to place <identify complainant> under surveillance or otherwise

engage in a course of conduct that placed <identify complainant> in reasonable fear of (his/her)

(death / serious bodily injury) or that of (his/her) (immediate family member / intimate partner).

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

stalking, 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 Vazquez v. Buhl, 150 Conn. App. 117, 124 (2014) (citing 47 U.S.C. § 230 (f) (2)).

2 State v. Johnson, 538 S.W.3d 32, 64 (2017) (citing 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (15)).

3 Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co., Inc., 445 F. Supp. 2d 1116, 1130 (2006) (citing 18

U.S.C § 2510 (14)), reversed in part on other grounds, 529 F.3d 892 (9th. Cir. 2008).

4 Cf. 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (5).

5 Scheffler v. Harrington, 245 A.3d. 780, 783 (Vt. 2020).

6 General Statutes § 53a-181d (a) (1).

7 General Statutes § 53a-181f (b) (1).

8 General Statutes § 53a-181f (b) (2).

9 General Statutes § 53a-3 (4).