Legal Evidence of Technology-Facilitated Abuse in Wisconsin: Surfacing Barriers Within and Beyond the Courtroom

Abusers routinely use technology to spy on and harass their targets. This harmful behavior is known as technology-facilitated abuse , or tech abuse. Survivors of tech abuse may turn to the legal system for safety and security, and to do so, they need evidence of tech abuse. However, prior work indicates challenges to collecting evidence of tech abuse and using it in legal proceedings. Thus, in this work, we study legal evidence used by survivors of tech abuse in Wisconsin, USA. We report on qualitative interviews and focus groups with 19 legal support providers who work with survivors seeking protective orders, divorces, and criminal charges. Our findings surface current practices that survivors and legal support providers use to prepare and present evidence of tech abuse in Wisconsin and the challenges they face. For example, survivors struggle to collect evidence of covert monitoring and surveillance. When they can collect evidence, it is often difficult to connect that evidence to the abuser due to the anonymous nature of many forms of tech abuse. In court, evidence of tech abuse is frequently challenged and vulnerable to objections and counter-evidence. And at the end of a proceeding, it's not uncommon for a judge to determine that the tech abuse does not meet the statutes. Informed by these results, we encourage CSCW and HCI researchers to work towards designing and deploying sociotechnical solutions that support survivors' use of evidence, in careful collaboration with advocates, legal experts, and survivors.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Published
2025-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3757622
Primary Topic
Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Legal Evidence of Technology-Facilitated Abuse in Wisconsin: Surfacing Barriers Within and Beyond the Courtroom

Naman Gupta, Sophie Stephenson, Rahul Chatterjee, Akhil Polamarasetty et al.
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
article

Legal Evidence of Technology-Facilitated Abuse in Wisconsin: Surfacing Barriers Within and Beyond the Courtroom

Naman Gupta, Sophie Stephenson, Rahul Chatterjee, Akhil Polamarasetty, Kyle Huang, David Youssef, Kayleigh Cowan
article en

Abstract

Abusers routinely use technology to spy on and harass their targets. This harmful behavior is known as technology-facilitated abuse , or tech abuse. Survivors of tech abuse may turn to the legal system for safety and security, and to do so, they need evidence of tech abuse. However, prior work indicates challenges to collecting evidence of tech abuse and using it in legal proceedings. Thus, in this work, we study legal evidence used by survivors of tech abuse in Wisconsin, USA. We report on qualitative interviews and focus groups with 19 legal support providers who work with survivors seeking protective orders, divorces, and criminal charges. Our findings surface current practices that survivors and legal support providers use to prepare and present evidence of tech abuse in Wisconsin and the challenges they face. For example, survivors struggle to collect evidence of covert monitoring and surveillance. When they can collect evidence, it is often difficult to connect that evidence to the abuser due to the anonymous nature of many forms of tech abuse. In court, evidence of tech abuse is frequently challenged and vulnerable to objections and counter-evidence. And at the end of a proceeding, it's not uncommon for a judge to determine that the tech abuse does not meet the statutes. Informed by these results, we encourage CSCW and HCI researchers to work towards designing and deploying sociotechnical solutions that support survivors' use of evidence, in careful collaboration with advocates, legal experts, and survivors.

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionVol. 9(7)
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), Wisconsin Disability Association (US), University College London (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.