Report: Guilty verdict overturned in MySpace suicide case
Lori Drew, the woman convicted of using a hoax MySpace profile to harass a teenage girl to the point of suicide, was acquitted by a Los Angeles judge on Thursday, Wired reported.
Judge George Wu overturned Drew's guilty verdict, which was issued in November, saying that if Drew had been convicted of a felony in the case, she would already have been sentenced. But because she was convicted of three misdemeanors--a significantly lighter offense than prosecutors originally sought--the constitutionality of the guilty verdict was less clear.
Drew, a Missouri resident, had been convicted of three misdemeanor counts of "accessing protected computers without authorization to obtain information to inflict emotional distress," each of which could have resulted in a year of jail and a $100,000 fine. But she hadn't been convicted of conspiracy, a felony that could've led to up to 20 years in prison.
The tragic situation unfolded in 2006, when Drew, her teenage daughter, and an 18-year-old employee of the family created a fake MySpace profile for a fictitious teenage boy that they used to harass one of Drew's daughter's classmates, 13-year-old Megan Meier. Meier hanged herself.
This was a situation in which traditional law did not align smoothly with the realities of the digital world: the prosecutors' argument was rooted in a terms of service violation, since MySpace officially outlaws impersonation and fictitious accounts.
Last year, the Electronic Frontier Foundation urged the courts to dismiss the case because of the precedent it could set. "Criminal charges for a 'terms of service' violation is a dramatic misapplication of the CFAA (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act), with far-ranging consequences for American computer users," the EFF said at the time, and argued that it could result in criminal charges for something as innocuous as a minor using the Google search engine.
Drew's lawyers had argued that the law being used against the defendant was vague and flawed, which the judge upheld Thursday when he threw out the guilty verdict. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act is typically used against malicious hackers.
According to Wired, the judge argued for nearly 45 minutes with U.S. Attorney Mark Krause over the specifics of the CFAA.
Caroline McCarthy, a CNET News staff writer, is a downtown Manhattanite happily addicted to social-media tools and restaurant blogs. Her pre-CNET resume includes interning at an IT security firm and brewing cappuccinos. E-mail Caroline. 
Yes, the laws used in this case were inappropriate and yes it would set a bad precedent. But that does not diminish the fact that Lori Drew is responsible for that girls death 100%, even if there is no law by which to charge her for it.
To say that Lori Drew is 100% responsible for the 13 year old's death without complete knowledge of the situation isn't logical ,it's simply based off "hunch". Unfortunately for the United States, a majority of judges share your viewpoint (ex, the original guilty verdict). While a judge is in a better position to rule on hunch, is that the way you truly want your legal system? Hunches nearly ALWAYS involve personal emotions, clouding neutral decision making. Again, Lori Drew isn't innocent; she's simply innocent against the charges brought against her. Enough publicity has surrounded this case that I assure you, justice will be served.
Adults versus teenagers? That IS criminal. This teen did not initiate this, the adult did.
Drew deserves lose everything.
Also, they will probably take this woman to civil court with a wrongful death suit and put her in the poor house.
Anyone who is against the use of torture, and who wishes to prosecute people in charge of Guatanamo Bay who have used methods of torture do obtain information should feel the same about Lori Drew. Her methods, although more socially enclined, were still torture methods.
The fact that Megan commited suicide can merely be looked at as a consequence of this womans torture.
mrcjacobs statement that what she did was not a criminal act is very demoralizing for our justice system. What she did was indeed a criminal act. Its sad that there are not laws that clearly define it as criminal.
"Suicide, by definition, is one's own act and decision."
Pushing someone to that decision is a crime and she needs to burn in hell for it.
"if Drew had not done what she did, the girl would still be alive."
Just exactly how would you be in a position to know that "fact" without direct involvement in the events? Please spare everyone your personal vendetta ethos and stick to the facts, not your emotional responses. How would you feel if you were being judged in that false manner?
No, this girl was just, as my one psychologist friend said: a suicide waiting to happen.
On the other hand I do strongly believe that there should be laws against using false id's for the purpose of doing wrongful acts. The fact that it is on the internet should never shield anyone from anything that would land them on the wrong side of the law if they did the same act in a local setting.
I also believe that there should be no differentation between someone that sends Emails, SMS, IM, or any other form of communication that is directly targeting an individual than someone that makes harrassing phone calls or sends real harrasing mail, packages, etc in a stalking situatution.
Too many people on the internet are too free with their comments, when in a face-to-face conversation with a real person looking them in the eyes, they would never act that same way. Usually it falls into the side of the line that includes name calling, hurling profanity around like they think it makes them special and generally leading me to believe that we are headed down the road to "Idiocracy".
I also believe that if this was a 50 year old man talking to her in the same way and never even came into contact with her or caused her such distress he would probably end up in jail, on a public list etc. so this woman being and adult conversing with a minor under false pretenses should be treated the same way. I have no sympathy for the woman at all.
You will be glad to know that your racism makes you look ignorant and that it has been reported as offensive.
I don't see how this one could be.
Do you really think it is a good idea to create new laws on the spot based on emotional reactions?
Who says she did nothing wrong? I have yet to read or hear any defense of her actions.
For example, if you are a 34 year old man, and you see a 13 year old kid playing basketball, and you run up, SWAT HIW LAYUP OFF THE COURT, LAUGH IN HIS FACE, GET THE BALL, DRIVE IN AND DUNK THE BALL HARD, then shout "IN YO FACE SUCKA!", that's totally wrong, but not illegal.
Also, without the real facts, its hard to say if Lori Drew is the primary cause of the 13 year old's suicide. It's seemingly clear to me and probably everyone else that she was the primary cause, but no one can be sure, and no one ever will. Bottom line; this case should spark an interest in legislature to draft a law against online abuse with criminal penalties. Its obvious that there is wrongdoing on Drew's part, now she deserves a punishment fitted to the crime.
I don't understand why the laws against stalking and harassment were not applied here. If they were able to prove that the "boyfirend account" was a sham, set up by this woman, for the purpose of harassing this poor kid, why is that not a crime? If she had hired someone to "pretend" to be a boyfriend, in a face to face situation, who then turned on the poor kid and verbally spread nasty rumors and comments.....she would be criminally responsible.
As for the pre=exsisting depression issue: IF someone walks into a bank and pulls a gun, and a person with heart trouble dies of a heart attack, that person is charged with the death....It doesn't matter if the criminal knew of the condition, it just matters if the dealth was a result of the criminal act. The acts of this woman pushed this kid over the edge.... She should be held accountable.
She is total scum, but that doesn't warrant making TOS violations a criminal act.
I have 15 and 17 year old daughters. Unlike many parents, I try to take responsibility for them, and if one of them was severely depressed, I wouldt severely curtail any so-called online socializing.
"if Drew had not done what she did, the girl would still be alive."
That is a statement that can never be proved. You are making a large assumption without all the facts.
Maybe she would be alive, but maybe she would have killed herself a month later, who knows?
The prosecution overreached badly in an effort to gain political points off of everyones justifiable anger.
While there may be no laws set in place currently to impose a sentence against such deviant behavior there should be. To deem her blame free is irresponsible at best. Laws are born to prevent such acts and cybercrimes such as this have been around for a long time. It was the perfect case to create protection laws for our children and this opportunity was ignored.
I am mortified that our legal system is so dispassionate towards civil issues. Stalking laws should be addressed to protect the public just as cyberbullying should be addressed. When a person says NO or STOP and their cries fall on deaf ears then I believe there should be a law to protect those who are not respected. I am absolutely horrified at the apathetic responses I am reading. I hope this woman is disgraced from the community as OJ was and made to live with her mistake.
With that said, the responsibility is also on her family who should have protected her from dangerous situations. My question is why did this child have her own computer? Why did the family allow her even on the computer without supervision? If this child was in counseling and on anti depressants where in the hll were they in protecting their child?!!! All in all both the family and this disgrace of a woman allowed the destruction of a little girl and for that I am sad.
Lori Drew: Yes, I am!
St. Peter: Go to hell!!
Judgement passed.....
Many cases in my opinion are a product of our modern living and careless parenting by not monitoring our children constantly. Preditors as well as horrible people like this have an open window into your home if you are allowing your child unchecked freedom on the internet as well as to socialize on facebook.com and the like. Google anyone, you can see their ridiculous facepages, all their stupid thoughts, friends pictures, kids pictures, hobbies and anything else previously considered private or privledged to someone you know well, all there at once for anyone to manipulate, all at once and in juvenile form - a preditors favorite thing. My child will not be allowed to waste it's time text messaging nonesense and crypted e-talk nor will it be allowed to post all information to make it vulnerable to the world, for some virtual social life that has not value and is false. Don't get me wrong, I like progress and obviously the computer, but we need to protect our kids and not appease them by doing anything they want unchecked, that is lazy and the public needs to get their **** together. In the same light, dont let your child play outside unsupervised even if you live in a small town, leave them with your 17 year old girlfriend, let them bike to the store a mile a way on a dirt road, have strangers in the house (real or virtual), let them tell anyone anything private about themselves (real or virtual) advertise your entire family in sticker pictures on the back of your minivan, with or without their names or the dog's, advertise what school your children attend via honor roll bumper stickers, advertise baby on board to baby snatchers everywhere that you have one to take, let your kids go to play independently down the street at a friends house of people you dont know intimately, don't have young male loser relatives live with you or spend any time at your house or the night, don't give your child anything less than 100% supervision, love and attention, support and confidence to handle themselves in this very complex and immediate world making your own family the center of it's universe.
I tell my child all the time, it's not you or most people, most people are good and there are only a few bad people. The problem is, we don't know who they are until they do something bad and get caught and then it's too late so WE DON'T TAKE CALCULATED RISKS period. I also listen, when there is someone who frightens my child or makes it uncomfortable I reassure it or leave or move away or investigate. I also encourage social activity at our house or only the house of intimate friends and provide lots of activities and avail myself to take my child to experience. It's just simple minded but I think it's going to work. I also assure my child that I am a protector and to trust my judgement but that I am not perfect and make mistakes. I just see this huge void right now in the world and I want people to remember, there are more people, there are more weirdos by ratio - keep your kids safe. Apply filters or pre-select sites but don't give your kids away to the internet, cell phones or otherwise.
Are we getting smarter or dumbing down to technology?
Did you notice I didnt say the sex of my child?
"God will take care of her, but until then, society should make this lady's life a living hell."
What kind of person are you (and more importantly, what kind of god are you worshipping?) that allows you to say such things? And how exactly should "society" make this lady's life a living hell? Round her up and burn her at the stake? Stone her perhaps?
Hopefully Lori Drew will spend many of her remaining years pondering the stupidity and hurtfulness of her actions. I feel confident she will never forget or forgive these events. But America neither needs nor will benefit from haters and vigilantes. We created a society of laws to govern us. We cannot change those laws willy nilly to satisfy the needs of those who simply want to live out revenge fantasies. Ease up folks and try taking the time to speak reasonably.
http://tinyurl.com/l5ejhz
.
Most people who commented here are based on reported information, yet didn't spend the time to read the actual court paper.
Even if the argument pushed the girl over the edge, you cannot expect anyone to believe that Lori's horrendous behavior didn't drive her in that direction. Lori is, by all accounts, someone who isn't free from guilt.
- by asimplemom July 2, 2009 9:18 PM PDT
- BravoOscar - you are wasting your time. I was on a blog about Casey Anthony and you have no idea how certain these hate wishing vigalantes are certain their god will avenge everyone they hate, ironic logic.
- Reply to this comment
-
-
- by ddesy July 3, 2009 6:33 AM PDT
- A parent cannot see their kids 24/7, you know. Do you think that this same kind of thing couldn't have happened without access to the Internet at home? Kids could access things like MySpace from school or the library in many cases.
-
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (86 Comments)I have an idea! Rather than depending on ordinary laws for extraordinary circumstances, or hey do not apply, or laws to protect our state or country from a vast international network of servers called the internet where they do not apply? How about if instead we also require a degree of personal accountability, especially when using the internet or allowing your minor children to use the internet. If you posted sumptuous pictures of yourself, your hobbies and your schedule on the front window of your house you would surely increase your chances of being preyed upon or worse; to what degree would you hold someone accountable then? What if their child had their picture, hobbies, MOODS, likes and dislikes posted on her bedroom window and the parents claimed ignorant? To what degree would you hold them accountable? I am not saying this OK to prey, I am trying to compare that the internet is alot like your front door and windows in your home; if left open and unlocked alot of things can happen - why take the chance when you don't have to? Rules like no teen girls in a teen boys room is a good start too! Why would you let your teen alone in their room with internet friends with the door shut? Worse, mostly they are probably fat hairy ***** yucky guys with dribbled cheetos down their wife beater talking to your kid (you are probably better off allowing her a real teen boy and take the chance of a Bristol scene).
Like guns, computers are dangerous in the hands of some children and lethal to others. Because we can not control the world, we can control ourselves. There are no laws for moral ineptitude nor should there be because then we would be judged by one standard and who is to say theirs is best. Should Casey Anthony be judged by the no lives of their own fat ugly toothless weirdos who lined her driveway in protest for her head on a stick for six months (these same beauties also felt justified stoning their property and home)? Like this example, this woman should not be judged by those damning her to hell, if in fact they believe that their god is the only true judge of a soul! Governing the laws of this country is supposed to be separated by church and state, as in "god" "jesus" "alla" "ali babba" or whoever a person worships for your own reasons is your own choice not to be imposed upon any other citizen in this country, ever. The laws are to govern everyone, and everyone is different. Can you imagine living in a fundamental islamic country where males are justified to murder their raped family members due to social alienation and offense of there utimate belief that women are in control of their tu-tu and they cause unwelcome attention?!!
I vote for personal accountability by household. We have enough laws on the books and even the lawmakers can't keep their johnsons in their pants (these are the very same people that supported impeaching a past president for seimen on a blue dress from a bj that cost the american taxpayers 46 million dollars for ken starr to discover, that now ask for understanding)! Hypocrites!!
I don't want to be judged by a hypocrite so I will be my own moral compass thank you!
Let's not watch Nancy Grace, let's watch our kids!
Whether or not a parent watches their kids, other adults cannot be allowed to harass them this way. The idea that allowing this to not be illegal is unfathomable.