I know it was the girl's choice to do what she did. I'm just shocked at the triggering circumstances.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
I first saw this nearly a week ago and I still can't think of anything to say.
--j_k
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:(She) explained the communication between the fake male profile and Megan was aimed at gaining Megan's confidence and finding out what Megan felt about her daughter and other people.
What a complete sicko.
Posted by Raventhief (Member # 9002) on :
...
I'm completely speechless. Instigation to suicide should be a crime. When it's an adult or, worse, several instigating a child, it should be treated as murder.
Posted by MEC (Member # 2968) on :
Can't the family be charged with impersonation as well as illegal online activity, and through which mentally and socially abused a minor which most likely played a large part in said minor's suicide? Those all seem like legal implications to me.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Yeah, I can't buy that imprsonating a minor for the purposes of communicating with a minor isn't SOME kind of crime... Does their internet connection use a phone line? If so, is that wire fraud?
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
At first I thought "what a typically muffed up witchy thing for a young teenage girl to do to another teenage girl."
Then they revealed the parents were involved.
What. Ugh.
Posted by Saephon (Member # 9623) on :
The sad thing is I could easily see a feuding girlfriend do this to someone. That it was instigated by adults just further enrages me against bad parents. There are so many people out there I would not trust with the raising and development of a child...
My heart breaks for Tina and Ron.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I read this story a few days ago, and the circumstances seem to bizarre and convoluted that I cannot help but imagine there is more to it.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
What struck you as convoluted? The "Other Mother" chose a dishonest method of checking out the motivations of her daughter's friend, and carelessly shared this method with the girl's peers, who treated it like their chance to get in their digs.
The girl turns out to have mental and emotional issues, takes it all very personally, and makes a terrible decision.
That's upsetting as heck to me, but it unfortunately doesn't seem too weird or unaccountable. People have done even worse things with even flimsier reasons.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think there might be a way to prosecute the creators of "Josh Evans" with some kind of sexual abuse. I mean, I don't know all of what was said, but it appears Megan saw it as a romantic relationship.
Posted by anti_maven (Member # 9789) on :
I don't know where to begin.
What an upsetting story on every level, and one with no clear resolution.
The parents of the poor girl driven to suicide have had their lives destroyed. This is compounded by the fact that the "guilty parties" will never be held accountable.
From a wider angel, I don't even see how this could have/could be prevented from happening. Even the strictest of parental controls assume that the parents are in someway responsible enough to monitor and control the behavoiur of their kids, which with this story just isn't the case.
Short of running a background check on each user, and monitoring communincations in real time, and with sufficient intelligence to spot abusive behaviour, it is would be well nigh impossible to prevent this scene being repeated.
We are constantly being advised to protect our kids from the Internet. Maybe we should add the caveat that this cuts both ways.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Wow. A friend of mine gave me a brief synopsis of the story a couple nights ago but I had no idea it went to this extent. That is just...stunning. Couldn't they charge the mom with misrepreresenting herself to a minor? That seems like it'd be some sort of crime. Kudos to the newspaper, by the way, for not printing the names of the people who didn't want their names printed. While I think the family responsible for this is despicable, and that the mother should face SOME sort of punishment, if the names got out they'd almost certainly have to move, and it'd at least temporarily ruin the daughter's life. I know, I know, the OTHER girl is dead as a result, but there were a LOT of other factors involved, and I just don't think they should have to face that sort of harrassment. And in a day and age where it seems all the news really cares about is getting as much info out as possible, and consequences be damned, I think there's something admirable in holding back.
Anyway, this is maybe the saddest story I've seen in a long time, and I think it says a lot about the dangers of the internet. Even the most watchful parents can suffer consequences as a result. I don't know how we'd do it, but there needs to be a way to protect kids better on the internet, from all sorts of things, but not the least of which is places like MySpace. There are far too many kids out there desparate for attention and yearning for a friend, and far too many sick bastards who'll prey on that feeling for their own gain, and not very much standing between them other than the watchful eye of wary parents, which apparently isn't always good enough. Don't take that as my putting blame on the parents, though I think they may have been wise to not allow the account in the first place, I think they were commendably responsible in their oversight of their daughter's use of the site.
And the useless wondering in my mind is: What the hell was that mother thinking in okaying this sort of behavior for her daughter, and even participating in it? Whatever happened to face to face conflict resolution, or at the very least, calling the mother of the girl you think your daughter has a problem with? I know that kids are using the internet as a way to avoid facing problems with their peers in a face to face manner, but come on, PARENTS don't know any better? What a waste of life.
Posted by DevilDreamt (Member # 10242) on :
The final Quote from the police report: "According to (her) 'somehow' other 'my space' users were able to access the fake male profile and Megan found out she had been duped. (She) stated she knew 'arguments' had broken out between Megan and others on 'my space.' (She) felt this incident contributed to Megan's suicide, but she did not feel 'as guilty' because at the funeral she found out 'Megan had tried to commit suicide before.'"
Take a look at that last sentence, because wow... Wouldn't that make you feel MORE guilty? I mean, normally? You find out that the 13 year old girl you're tormenting and encouraging to commit suicide has a history of depression, and somehow that makes you feel less guilty?
Where's the logic there?
That's like saying "Oh yes, sure he was starving, but he'd been starving for awhile, so when I stole the last of his food I couldn't really feel bad about it. I mean, he had been hungry for so long, I figured that stealing all of his food wasn't going to make much of a difference anyway. I mean, sure, he died, but he had almost starved to death before, so what's the big deal?"
It's almost like she's incapable of seeing the world from another person's point of view. Like she can't really accept that other people are real. The whole "joke" reeks of that kind of unintentional maliciousness. Assuming that they're not very cruel people, I would describe their behavior as self-centered to the point of being socially retarded.
[ November 20, 2007, 08:38 AM: Message edited by: DevilDreamt ]
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
It also says a lot about the importance of an unkind word at the wrong moment.
I've read a lot about suicide. Often little things can be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Someone wrote "I told myself if anyone smiled at me, just one person, on the way to the bridge (to jump off) then I would not do it". Apparently nobody did. Obviously that person's problems went deeper than strangers not smiling at them, but so what if they did? Would it hurt so much for people to just be kinder?
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
Oh, the names are definitely out. As well as information about their businesses (including a website), people and businesses who advertise with the mother's business, their home address, telephone number, the school their daughter goes to, her name, etc. It's been confirmed by neighbors, Internet sleuths, and a "clue" dropped by either Megan's aunt or mother. There was plenty of information in the original article to figure out who these people were.
I certainly won't post their names here. But if you wanted to know, a simple Internet search is all it would take.
From what I've been able to find out, they're already being harassed by phone calls, and people are calling the businesses which advertise with the mother's business and asking them to boycott.
So yeah. Their names are out. And I would think it very surprising if the original newswriter didn't realize he was giving more than enough infomation to figure it out.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Now this takes the cake, I'm always surprised when I still get shocked at people's behavior. Not just the original hoaxers, but now this excrement: http://meganhaditcoming.blogspot.com/ As a commenter summed up, if she really knew the girl, she's one sick *blank*, and if this site is a hoax, she's one sick *blank*.
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Couldn't they charge the mom with misrepreresenting herself to a minor? That seems like it'd be some sort of crime. Kudos to the newspaper, by the way, for not printing the names of the people who didn't want their names printed. While I think the family responsible for this is despicable, and that the mother should face SOME sort of punishment, if the names got out they'd almost certainly have to move, and it'd at least temporarily ruin the daughter's life. I know, I know, the OTHER girl is dead as a result, but there were a LOT of other factors involved, and I just don't think they should have to face that sort of harrassment. And in a day and age where it seems all the news really cares about is getting as much info out as possible, and consequences be damned, I think there's something admirable in holding back.
The newspaper held back the names, but it caused a storm in the blogosphere, and the names have been unearthed by bloggers. Lori Drew is the mother that created the fake account specifically to mess with Megan.
I don't know what law they could be charged with sucessfully. Supposedly the FBI investigated. http://www.bloggernews.net/111748 Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Well, at least they tried, or appeared to try. I guess it's too much to hope that in this day and age anyone can hope to have privacy once the public eye even bats an eyelash in your direction.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
The parents who engaged in this are despicable human beings. It's one thing for kids to do this; I think it's mean, too often tolerated, and should be subject to discipline more often, but not not necessarily evil.
For the adults to do it means they are either evil or have only the maturity of a teenager. And the maturity of a teenager coupled with the power of an adult is a scary thing.
***
One thing I try to do when I read a story that causes a gut reaction that the law should do something is try to define either the crime or the civil cause of action. Often I find that the act cannot really be the subject of the law, not because it's not morally worthy of having that kind of force behind it, but because there's no way to define the behavior to be targeted.
In this case, I have a hard time defining a crime targeted to this kind of thing. Pretending to be someone you're not is accepted on the Internet. It gives rise to criminal liability only in rare circumstances - when it causes monetary loss or results in impersonation of another living person to that person's harm, for example.
I can see a case for meeting the mental culpability of negligent homicide, given that the parents new of previous suicide attempts. To me, this rises to criminal negligence. However, the intervening act of suicide will make causation very hard to prove.
It's possible that on-line harassment laws could apply - there should be no problem proving intent here. But that misses the true harm caused here.
On the civil side, intentional infliction of emotional distress and wrongful death might be possibilities. It would depend on the specifics of state law.
One aspect that needs to be looked into is the harm being done by these parents to their daughter in teaching her that this type of behavior is OK.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Any chance a child abuse charge would have a chance of sticking?
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think impersonating a minor and engaging in romantic overtures could be made illegal. Sure "romantic overture" could be difficult to quantify, but that's what a jury is for. I mean, take the suicide out of the equation, it's still an unbelievably creepy undertaking.
And it's not like predators who impersonate minors to draw kids in say what they intend up front. They probably start out a lot like the friendship with "Josh Evans" did.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Any chance a child abuse charge would have a chance of sticking?
Abuse of the girl whom the parents helped in tormenting the girl who committed suicide? I don't know. I'm not sure I'd really want them to stick based on this alone, although it's very, very tempting. If what they did isn't a crime on its own, I'm not sure how deeply the government should be involved.
If it is a crime, then I think they've committed at least child neglect, which in many states includes making a child in their care require services. And "services" here would include juvenile adjudication of the criminal acts.
If you're talking about abuse of the girl who committed suicide, it's possible. However, most states require some sort of authority over the child before child abuse charges can be brought.
quote:Sure "romantic overture" could be difficult to quantify, but that's what a jury is for.
When too much is left to the jury, it can raise constitutional due process issues. It's a highly technical point that I'm not equipped to explain fully here. Just something to be aware of when defining crimes.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think if the Josh character ever said he loved her or wanted to date or longed to be with her, that should be enough. If they kept it to "you're special, you're beautiful" then, no.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
I'd say Megan's parents should go to jail, but this will haunt them forever, which is enough for me.
Posted by Eowyn-sama (Member # 11096) on :
From what I read, it sounds like they did their best to monitor Megan's internet contacts, why do they deserve jail?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Why should Megan's parents go to jail? They were ignorant, but I don't think they were necessarily criminally ignorant.
Posted by calaban (Member # 2516) on :
Isn't a person culpable for what they cause to happen rather what they intend. I don't understand how those involved can disassociate themselves from the event.
It just seems that thier actions viewed in the light of thier reactions after the event seem just a little more sinister in nature.
More like an intentionally callous and inhuman minimalization of a minors life than a hoax that turned horribly wrong.
I just don't understand how someone can knowingly contribute to the death of someone then go to thier families events and invite thier familiy into your house or even ask favors of them. That just seems sociopathic. Evil.
I also don't see how the parents could have done anything different. Sure banning her from myspace altogether would have prevented the issue; but the attack was specific by known individuals considered friends of the familiy.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
Why should Megan's parents go to jail? From reading the article, it sounded like they were doing their best to monitor her internet behavior, be involved in her life, and encourage her happiness.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
quote:Originally posted by calaban: Isn't a person culpable for what they cause to happen rather what they intend. I don't understand how those involved can disassociate themselves from the event.
I'd say their intent was to make Megan feel bad, which they were successful at. Very successful.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
Even without a suicide on their hands, the idea of parents tricking someone's kid over the internet, and making them think they had a friend, is absolutely horrifying.
And then how friendly they were to Megan's parents? Sociopaths.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
BTW, this paragraph has always bothered me:
quote: Later that day, Ron opened his daughter's MySpace account and viewed what he believes to be the final message Megan saw - one the FBI would be unable to retrieve from the hard drive.
I don't understand what that means. If it's a MySpace message, it persists on her account, back on the MySpace servers; it doesn't really live on the hard drive of her local computer.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:Anyway, this is maybe the saddest story I've seen in a long time, and I think it says a lot about the dangers of the internet.
Actually, I don't think this story shows that the internet is dangerous. I think it shows that being mean is dangerous.
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
According to Megan's parents' Today Show interview, they've talked to the other parents, and rather than showing any remorse, they've stated they feel no guilt and wish Megan's parents would stop talking about it.
Yeah, stop talking about your daughter that killer herself, it annoys us. There is really something dangerously wrong with those people!
Posted by camus (Member # 8052) on :
quote:I don't understand what that means. If it's a MySpace message, it persists on her account, back on the MySpace servers; it doesn't really live on the hard drive of her local computer.
Yeah, I found that a bit peculiar as well. This part also:
quote:Ron said a stumbling block is that the FBI was unable to retrieve the electronic messages from Megan's final day, including that final message that only Ron saw.
It's odd that no one has a record of that final message.
Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
I don't think criminal charges should be fired. What those parents did was incredibly mean, but they didn't make any explicit threats. I think creating a law that would make it a crime is also inappropriate. Making "mean" speech a crime just seems like a potential slippery slope. Insulting someone should not be a crime.
I think a civil suit is most appropriate in this case.
Posted by MEC (Member # 2968) on :
Shouldn't the FBI be potentially able to retrieve the information from the "Josh" computer?
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I think there might be a way to prosecute the creators of "Josh Evans" with some kind of sexual abuse. I mean, I don't know all of what was said, but it appears Megan saw it as a romantic relationship.
While I think they should be held accountable, sexual abuse isn't the best way to do that, IMO.
There was no sex, no physical contact, not even another real person. I don't think we want to open that particular can of worms, even for this.
Wire fraud would work, as would reckless endangerment I suspect.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Isn't a person culpable for what they cause to happen rather what they intend.
Legally, the answer is "sometimes."
Intent is the dominant feature of attempted crimes, certain forms of assault, and part of the grading of various forms of homicide.
What they cause is sometimes relevant, too. You can't be charged with homicide if your actions didn't cause a death, for instance.
Here, though, it will be hard to prove they caused the death in a legal (criminal) sense.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I don't understand what that means. If it's a MySpace message, it persists on her account, back on the MySpace servers; it doesn't really live on the hard drive of her local computer.
Its probably a combination of journalist simplification and insufficient detail.
If it works anything like Facebook, you're right. Very little is stored on the local computer. However, the problem is that the other parents deleted "Josh"'s account. If I had to guess, they may have implemented MySpace in a way so that a deleted account cascades the delete to whatever interactions that user had, deleting that final message (and all other messages from him) as well. (Rather than keeping all the messages but have them essentially pointing to nothing, or a dummy placeholder)
MySpace might not have (or may be unwilling to find, for legal or other reasons) backups for that profile, particularly if the parents deleted the profile right after they sent the message.
MEC: The other computer would be useless for the same reason.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
So if they deleted the account, could they at least stand on some kind of destruction of evidence?
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
I agree that criminal charges would be difficult to press, and more difficult to successfully prosecute in this case.
However, I'd be interested in knowing if Megan's parents would have the potential for a "Wrongful Death" lawsuit.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
For some reason I find the concept of a lawsuit more troubling than criminal charges.
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
What I want to know is how the OtherParents knew that something had happened to Megan that night. They called the other girl who knew about the myspace account before the ambulance left Megan's house to tell her that something had happened to Megan and not to say anything about the account.
How did they know the ambulance was there, and if they could see it, how did they know it was for Megan?
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Lucky guess?
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Maybe because Megan was wigging out?
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
Maybe. It just seemed odd to me.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I do have to think that if my mom had been Megan's mom, and Megan had disobeyed and not logged off immediately while she was walking out the door, and there had been previous trouble with the internet/MySpace, the brother would have been late to the orthodontist while my mom physically went down and logged her out herself.
But I don't think the mother's failure to do so is criminal.
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
kq, I think you're right. But she did so much more Internet monitoring than other parents that it's really sad that one lapse in judgment had such horrific consequences.
I think this serves as a good reminder to parents that often teenagers lack the foresight to look beyond their current situation. Things that seem so trivial to adults can be catastrophic to teenagers, and we adults have to be careful not to just brush off their troubles and concerns because we don't understand ourselves why it's such a big deal.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Suicide is something like the second highest cause of death of teenagers, after vehicle accidents. I think it's wise to always keep the possibility of suicide in mind when dealing with teens. They have the physical power and capability of an adult, but a very limited perspective of life. Often failing abysmally in one small social group can seem catastrophic to a teen who views it as representative of his or her entire life, when maybe there were just a lot of jerks in that school or that town.
One of my friends in high school committed suicide. I honestly can say that it's something one never gets over, the suicide of a friend. Please don't be mean. You never know how much more you might hurt someone than you intended.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax:
quote:Anyway, this is maybe the saddest story I've seen in a long time, and I think it says a lot about the dangers of the internet.
Actually, I don't think this story shows that the internet is dangerous. I think it shows that being mean is dangerous.
Well, I don't think those things are mutually exclusive, I think it can show both, and it does. There ARE predators in the internet, and thus the internet presents a unique vehicle for them to find victims that is different from most everything else in life.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I don't understand what that means. If it's a MySpace message, it persists on her account, back on the MySpace servers; it doesn't really live on the hard drive of her local computer.
Its probably a combination of journalist simplification and insufficient detail.
If it works anything like Facebook, you're right. Very little is stored on the local computer. However, the problem is that the other parents deleted "Josh"'s account. If I had to guess, they may have implemented MySpace in a way so that a deleted account cascades the delete to whatever interactions that user had, deleting that final message (and all other messages from him) as well. (Rather than keeping all the messages but have them essentially pointing to nothing, or a dummy placeholder)
MySpace might not have (or may be unwilling to find, for legal or other reasons) backups for that profile, particularly if the parents deleted the profile right after they sent the message.
Michael deleted his Myspace account. I'm fairly certain that when he deleted it, all of the comments and such he left me disappeared as well. They aren't there anymore, at any rate, nor are his comments to any of his other Myspace friends, as far as I can tell. And on Facebook, he seems to have just disappeared completely. So...I'd say it's possible that the dad read the message, and then when the other parents deleted the account, maybe the message disappeared as well.
After being implicated in Megan's death, they filed a criminal complaint against her father for wrecking the foosball table he was storing for them.
The community has passed a law against internet harrassment. Insufficient penalty, but all that the council could legally do.
[ November 23, 2007, 02:35 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by Saephon (Member # 9623) on :
Maybe I missed it in the first article in the original post, but after reading that LA Times one I just now realized the Meiers had another daughter, Allison, who is 11. For some reason I thought Megan had been an only child; I don't know why, but knowing she leaves behind a sister whose parents are getting divorced....I feel even worse now Posted by Wendybird (Member # 84) on :
The utter contempt the "josh" family had for Megan's family is incredible. To ask them to store something for them, to act friendly knowing that the reason their daughter died was a direct result of the fake account. WOW. Such complete disregard for another person is just too horrible for words.
Man.
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
There's a youtube with a recording of the woman's outgoing message where she says "I did it for the lulz."
I really think someone is going to kill these people.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Go internet community, go!
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
It's all so sad. I have to wonder if they parents divorce because on the one hand, Megan didn't have the supervision they had agreed on (and was to young to be on MySpace to begin with) for the mother's part, while the dad deleted the most damning of the messages.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
I would think you can't keep loving someone when your life is consummed with hatred for others.
You know, the worst part is that I can even understand how it all got started. You want to make sure your kid isn't being harassed so you check up on her ex-friend. I'm not sure what she thought she could do about it if Megan was spreading lies about the daughter, but I know most people want to know these things. It started out on the far edge of normal (Why not a girl who wanted to be her friend? Why a guy who thought she was pretty?) but managed to spiral into pure evil. All that in one day. It's scary to think how fast it degraded into that.
Posted by Toretha (Member # 2233) on :
*bump*
I just read this, and I think it's terrible.
And I'm not talking about the suicide. I think that's awful too, but I think what these people from the internet are doing is worse.
Because they know there are children in that house. They're trying to torment the parents, who I agree, deserve whatever happens to them, but the effects of constant harassment and fear on the children is FAR worse than anything the parents did to Megan.
You don't get to ignore the innocent casulties along the way in your quest for justice. The results of that behavior is dispicable
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:It started out on the far edge of normal (Why not a girl who wanted to be her friend? Why a guy who thought she was pretty?) but managed to spiral into pure evil. All that in one day.
No, it didn't all happen in one day.
For one thing, they romanced this girl, they had multiple people running the fake ID including guest turns by her peers. Their response in the aftermath of her death is really what gnaws people.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Toretha: . . . Because they know there are children in that house. They're trying to torment the parents, who I agree, deserve whatever happens to them, but the effects of constant harassment and fear on the children . . .
You had me here.
quote:Originally posted by Toretha: . . . I think that's awful too, but I think what these people from the internet are doing is worse.
. . . but the effects of constant harassment and fear on the children is FAR worse than anything the parents did to Megan.
You lost me there.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
From my understanding of the timeline, the Josh thing was a little weird but basically benign for about a month or so. Then when the girls had the fight she started getting all the nasty emails. Later that day, she killed herself.
Unless your argument is that if they hadn't been flirting with her for the month leading up, then she wouldn't have been so devestated that day. I concede that point.
It still crossed the line from bizarre to dangerous really fast.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
What Icarus said - both parts.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Thirded.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
Yahoo has a new story up. Lori Drew, the mother that pretended to be a boy interested in Megan, has been indicted.
Megan's mother credits internet outrage for helping keep pressure on the case.
quote: "I'm thrilled that this woman is going to face charges that she has needed to face since the day we found out what was going on, and since the day she decided to be a part of this entire ridiculous stunt," she said.
The jury reached unanimous verdicts on 3 counts and struggled over a fourth earlier this week.
There's still a defense motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that Drew did not ever see the contract at issue in the case pending before the judge.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:U.S. District Judge George Wu has not yet ruled on a defense motion that, if granted, would overturn even the misdemeanors for lack of evidence, and result in a judgment of acquittal. It's also unclear whether the government will seek a new trial on the felony conspiracy charge.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
quote: The case hinged on the government's novel argument that violating MySpace's terms of service for the purpose of harming another was the legal equivalent of computer hacking, and Drew faced a maximum sentence of five years in prison for each charge.
If that's true, then I'm glad the jury cleared her of the felony charge. That's not a legal precedent I'd be happy with.
I also hope this isn't what got them out of it:
quote: But testimony in the case offered by prosecution witness Ashley Grills under a grant of immunity showed that nobody involved in the hoax actually read the terms of service.
Lying to MySpace shouldn't let you get away with online bullying. If you have to click a button saying you read the terms, then you should be accountable to them.
I hope MySpace bans the woman from having an account with them again.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Nobody reads the ToS anywhere...they're more of a joke than anything.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Obviously that person's problems went deeper than strangers not smiling at them, but so what if they did? Would it hurt so much for people to just be kinder?