Reporting on what might be a first: a woman arrested for virtually “poking” someone on Facebook, violating an order of protection.

"According to the affidavit filed in Sumner County General Sessions Court, Shannon Jackson is accused of using the “poke” option on Facebook to contact a Hendersonville woman, thus violating the terms of the order of protection, which stipulates “no telephoning, contacting or otherwise communicating with the petitioner.”

Violating an order of protection is a Class A misdemeanor. If convicted, violators can be punished with up to 11 months, 29 days in jail and a possible fine of up to $2,500.

via Facebook ‘poke’ leads to woman’s arrest | tennessean.com | The Tenn...

The recipient of a Facebook “poke” receives a message saying “You’ve been poked by .” Maybe not the traditional definition of contact or communication, but it’s contact all the same. And it’s easy to see how a virtual poke can be just as threatening as a real-life poke.

Maybe the terms of an order of protection should be expanded to include no poking, sharing, emailing, friending, tweeting, IM’ing or DM’ing.

Caveat Emptor Poker, people.

http://trueslant.com/andreaitis/2009/10/10/woman-arrested-for-faceb...