Harassment, Stalking, Misconduct Blackmail

P

Psalm_27

New Member
Jurisdiction
California
I filed a small claim against my neighbor regarding payment for his portion of replacing the fence between our adjoining properties. We agreed to mediate the case. During mediation my neighbor agreed to pay some portion of the compensation I was requesting. However, I did not accept his offer. He then made mention that he has a recording of a conversation I had with him on his front porch when I first introduced myself to him, which was prior to our dispute regarding the fence and had nothing to do with the fence. Apparently, this was recorded on his doorbell camera. He asked me if I remembered what I said during this conversation, clearly implying that I said something that could be damaging to me. I recall that the conversation was pleasant, and I do not recall saying anything that may be damaging to me. He told me that I should accept his offer because he has this recording. I again denied his offer. He made mention of this same video and conversation twice during the mediation.

I reached out to the mediator regarding this, and asked if she could provide an affidavit of this exchange, as I believed it to be coercion or an attempt to blackmail me. The arbitrator responded that she could not provide this as it was agreed during arbitration that all conversations were to be confidential, and she is legally precluded from being a witness to anything that occurred during arbitration.

Due to the court running out of time to conduct the hearing, they delayed the hearing for six months. Therefore, the claim has not yet been resolved.

I am unsure what I should do at this point to protect myself. One option I am considering is filing a police report to document what I believe to be attempted blackmail. The other option may be to send a letter to my neighbor documenting what he said and notifying him that I consider what he said as attempted blackmail. I would also mention to him that his comments were made before both the mediator and an observer, so there are two witnesses.
Even though they cannot testify against him, I don't believe is aware of this, and this may make him reconsider following through with any blackmail.
 
Making a threat to perform an act that one has a legal right to do is not extortion (blackmail). It sounds like your neighbor feels his evidence is compelling enough to win the case.
 
You're certainly free to reach out to the police, but I doubt anything will happen, and there is no need to "document" or value in "documenting" what happened.

Note that California has no law regarding "blackmail." Conduct that would generally be considered blackmail falls under section 518 of the Penal Code, which provides as follows: "(a) Extortion is the obtaining of property or other consideration from another, with his or her consent, or the obtaining of an official act of a public officer, induced by a wrongful use of force or fear, or under color of official right." "'[C]onsideration' means anything of value," and "fear" includes "a threat . . . [t]o accuse the individual threatened, or a relative of his or her, or a member of his or her family, of a crime," "[t]o expose, or to impute to him, her, or them a deformity, disgrace, or crime," or "[t]o expose a secret affecting him, her, or them." Section 519.

The problem for you is that your neighbor doesn't appear to have made any specific threat. For all you know, he's bluffing.

As you should be able to figure from what I wrote above, your suggested letter could be construed as extortion or attempted extortion.

I disagree with Zigner's assertion that "Making a threat to perform an act that one has a legal right to do is not extortion (blackmail)." For starters, the video in question may have been illegally made. But even if we assume it was legally made, if the video includes embarrassing information, the neighbor has a legal right to disseminate that information and/or the recording itself. However, threatening to do it in order to obtain an advantage in a legal dispute is unquestionably illegal. As noted, the problem for the OP is that the neighbor's threat was way too vague.

P.S. I tried to include a link to PC 518, et seq., but I wasn't able to do so. It's easily googlable if you want to read it.
 
Psalm_27 said:
The other option may be to send a letter to my neighbor documenting what he said and notifying him that I consider what he said as attempted blackmail. I would also mention to him that his comments were made before both the mediator and an observer, so there are two witnesses.
Click to expand...

The aforementioned PC 518 is part of Chapter 7 - Extortion, which has many elements and penalties.

law.justia.com

2024 California Code :: Penal Code - PEN :: PART 1 - OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS :: TITLE 13 - OF CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY :: CHAPTER 7 - Extortion

Extortion from TITLE 13, PART 1 of the California Penal Code (2024)
law.justia.com law.justia.com

What he is doing is in there. Print it out and hand it to him. You don't even need to say or do anything to "protect" yourself. The law will handle him if he commits a crime.

Which, by the way he has already done by making and possessing the recording without your consent. California is an "all party" consent state for recording conversations.

Start with PC 631 and read the sections that apply.

law.justia.com

2024 California Code :: Penal Code - PEN :: PART 1 - OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS :: TITLE 15 - MISCELLANEOUS CRIMES :: CHAPTER 1.5 - Invasion of Privacy :: Section 631.

Cal. PEN Code § 631 - 631. (a) Any person who, by means of any machine, instrument, or contrivance, or in any other manner, intentionally taps, or makes any unauthorized connection, whether physically, electrically, acoustically,
law.justia.com law.justia.com

Print the appropriate sections and hand them to him. You can remind him that he can go to jail for possessing that recording. Just don't threaten anything.
 
Got it. That is very useful information.

I understand that neither of the two options I was considering have no upside and potential downside.

My concern is that if he does follow through with exposing information that may be damaging to me as a direct result of me not accepting his offer, I want to be able to at least make the case that he did so to defame me as an act of retaliation.

Are there any suggestions regarding what actions, if any, may be helpful to me from a strategic standpoint?
 
Psalm_27 said:
I filed a small claim against my neighbor regarding payment for his portion of replacing the fence between our adjoining properties. We agreed to mediate the case. During mediation my neighbor agreed to pay some portion of the compensation I was requesting. However, I did not accept his offer. He then made mention that he has a recording of a conversation I had with him on his front porch when I first introduced myself to him, which was prior to our dispute regarding the fence and had nothing to do with the fence. Apparently, this was recorded on his doorbell camera. He asked me if I remembered what I said during this conversation, clearly implying that I said something that could be damaging to me. I recall that the conversation was pleasant, and I do not recall saying anything that may be damaging to me. He told me that I should accept his offer because he has this recording. I again denied his offer. He made mention of this same video and conversation twice during the mediation.

I reached out to the mediator regarding this, and asked if she could provide an affidavit of this exchange, as I believed it to be coercion or an attempt to blackmail me. The arbitrator responded that she could not provide this as it was agreed during arbitration that all conversations were to be confidential, and she is legally precluded from being a witness to anything that occurred during arbitration.

Due to the court running out of time to conduct the hearing, they delayed the hearing for six months. Therefore, the claim has not yet been resolved.

I am unsure what I should do at this point to protect myself. One option I am considering is filing a police report to document what I believe to be attempted blackmail. The other option may be to send a letter to my neighbor documenting what he said and notifying him that I consider what he said as attempted blackmail. I would also mention to him that his comments were made before both the mediator and an observer, so there are two witnesses.
Even though they cannot testify against him, I don't believe is aware of this, and this may make him reconsider following through with any blackmail.
Click to expand...
How long ago was this alleged recording made that you can't remember if you did or said something that could show you in a bad light or worse? What caused the need for the fence replacement?

You should have done some due diligence in researching CA law on property line fences before you started making demands on your neighbor. Had you followed the procedures of California Code, Civil Code - CIV § 841 in the beginning, you would not be in this mess.


(a) Adjoining landowners shall share equally in the responsibility for maintaining the boundaries and monuments between them.
(b)(1) Adjoining landowners are presumed to share an equal benefit from any fence dividing their properties and, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties in a written agreement, shall be presumed to be equally responsible for the reasonable costs of construction, maintenance, or necessary replacement of the fence.
(2) Where a landowner intends to incur costs for a fence described in paragraph (1), the landowner shall give 30 days' prior written notice to each affected adjoining landowner. The notice shall include notification of the presumption of equal responsibility for the reasonable costs of construction, maintenance, or necessary replacement of the fence. The notice shall include a description of the nature of the problem facing the shared fence, the proposed solution for addressing the problem, the estimated construction or maintenance costs involved to address the problem, the proposed cost sharing approach, and the proposed timeline for getting the problem addressed.
(3) The presumption in paragraph (1) may be overcome by a preponderance of the evidence demonstrating that imposing equal responsibility for the reasonable costs of construction, maintenance, or necessary replacement of the fence would be unjust. In determining whether equal responsibility for the reasonable costs would be unjust, the court shall consider all of the following:

(A) Whether the financial burden to one landowner is substantially disproportionate to the benefit conferred upon that landowner by the fence in question.
(B) Whether the cost of the fence would exceed the difference in the value of the real property before and after its installation.
(C) Whether the financial burden to one landowner would impose an undue financial hardship given that party's financial circumstances as demonstrated by reasonable proof.
(D) The reasonableness of a particular construction or maintenance project, including all of the following:

(i) The extent to which the costs of the project appear to be unnecessary or excessive.
(ii) The extent to which the costs of the project appear to be the result of the landowner's personal aesthetic, architectural, or other preferences.
(E) Any other equitable factors appropriate under the circumstances.
(4) Where a party rebuts the presumption in paragraph (1) by a preponderance of the evidence, the court shall, in its discretion, consistent with the party's circumstances, order either a contribution of less than an equal share for the costs of construction, maintenance, or necessary replacement of the fence, or order no contribution.
(c) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meanings:

(1) "Landowner" means a private person or entity that lawfully holds any possessory interest in real property, and does not include a city, county, city and county, district, public corporation, or other political subdivision, public body, or public agency.
(2) "Adjoining" means contiguous to or in contact with.
Click to expand...
 
Psalm_27 said:
My concern is that if he does follow through with exposing information that may be damaging to me as a direct result of me not accepting his offer, I want to be able to at least make the case that he did so to defame me as an act of retaliation.
Click to expand...

Let's recall that you haven't told us - perhaps because you don't know - what this recording says. However, unless he's completely blowing smoke, it's apparently based on something you said and, as such, cannot be defamatory.


Psalm_27 said:
Are there any suggestions regarding what actions, if any, may be helpful to me from a strategic standpoint?
Click to expand...

Unless you know what the recording says and share it with us, there's nothing much we can tell you. Since you're in small claims court, you can't serve a discovery request. If you don't know what it says, do you really think that, in what was apparently the first ever "conversation [you] had with him on his front porch when [you] first introduced [your]self to him," you said "something that could be damaging to" you? Do you make a habit of revealing damaging information to complete strangers?
 
Psalm_27 said:
I want to be able to at least make the case that he did so to defame me as an act of retaliation.
Click to expand...

So far, he's only said it to you. That's not defamation.

Psalm_27 said:
Are there any suggestions regarding what actions, if any, may be helpful to me from a strategic standpoint?
Click to expand...

There's no way, really, to prevent somebody from committing a civil or criminal offense against you if they are determined to. When it happens, if it happens, you can avail yourself of legal remedies.
 
welkin said:
How long ago was this alleged recording made that you can't remember if you did or said something that could show you in a bad light or worse? What caused the need for the fence replacement?

You should have done some due diligence in researching CA law on property line fences before you started making demands on your neighbor. Had you followed the procedures of California Code, Civil Code - CIV § 841 in the beginning, you would not be in this mess.
Click to expand...
The alleged recording was made two years ago.

I speculate the comment I may have made may have an unintended racial connotation. I am white and my neighbor is black. I recalled at the time thinking that I may have said something in a way that he may have construed as being insensitive to people of color. Being that the conversation occurred two years ago, I cannot recall what I said. However, being that it was a friendly conversation, I am confident that I did not make any derogatory comments directed toward him, personally, racial or otherwise.

I did follow California Civil Code 841 from the beginning. He agreed that the fence needed replacement as it was deteriorated and falling apart. We both agreed to obtain quotes for the work, which I did and he did not after a period of about one year. Prior to constructing the fence, I told him what the cost would be, what his portion of the cost would be, what type of fence I planned on constructing, the grade of lumber, etc., and when I planned on starting. He acknowledged this and told me at the time that he would not be paying for any of the costs. I asked him why he would not be paying for any of the costs, to which he did not respond. Due to the condition of the fence, I proceeded with the replacement on my own.
 
Psalm_27 said:
I speculate the comment I may have made may have an unintended racial connotation. I am white and my neighbor is black. I recalled at the time thinking that I may have said something in a way that he may have construed as being insensitive to people of color. Being that the conversation occurred two years ago, I cannot recall what I said. However, being that it was a friendly conversation, I am confident that I did not make any derogatory comments directed toward him, personally, racial or otherwise.
Click to expand...

The recording appears to be more useful to the former neighbor than it will be to a person uttering and publishing racist or discriminatory comments.

That said, the neighbor is the victim in the matter under discussion.

I suspect he or she will SLOW PLAY their bombshell, awaiting a time and place that'll prove MORE beneficial to their side over yours.

I'm puzzled why anyone, but a racist, would interject racially disparaging commentary while a discussion of money and cost splitting is underway?

It might be better for you to NOT interrupt the sleeping canine's slumber.
 
Psalm_27 said:
I did follow California Civil Code 841 from the beginning. He agreed that the fence needed replacement as it was deteriorated and falling apart. We both agreed to obtain quotes for the work, which I did, and he did not after a period of about one year.
Click to expand...
So, you have all this in writing before you incurred any cost?

(2) Where a landowner intends to incur costs for a fence described in paragraph (1), the landowner shall give 30 days' prior written notice to each affected adjoining landowner. The notice shall include notification of the presumption of equal responsibility for the reasonable costs of construction, maintenance, or necessary replacement of the fence. The notice shall include a description of the nature of the problem facing the shared fence, the proposed solution for addressing the problem, the estimated construction or maintenance costs involved to address the problem, the proposed cost sharing approach, and the proposed timeline for getting the problem addressed.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:

Ask a Question

Create new topic

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top