Mugs

Lori Drew Not Guilty of Felonies in Landmark Cyberbullying Trial

Wednesday, 26. November 2008, 20:30:28

Lori Drew, the 49-year-old woman charged in the first federal cyberbullying case, was cleared of felony computer-hacking charges by a jury Wednesday morning, but convicted of three misdemeanors. The jury deadlocked on a remaining felony charge of conspiracy.

After just over a day of deliberation, the six-man, six-woman jury acquitted Drew of three felony charges of violating the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, in an emotionally charged case that stemmed from a 2006 MySpace hoax targeting a 13-year-old girl, who later committed suicide.

You can read the rest on Wired, Lori Drew Not Guilty of Felonies in Landmark Cyberbullying Trial

My opinion, wrong verdict!

My Opera AwardsPolitically Correct

Comments

noah counte # 26. November 2008, 21:08

This whole thing is so sad.

One one hand, I'm not sure how I feel about using laws that weren't meant to punish this kind of behavior to prosecute her. At the same time, this kind of behavior really must be deterred.

She's not getting off scott free - misdemeanors will follow her around, and it sounds as though the neighbors and blogosphere isn't going to let her rest easily, either.

OkayPJs # 26. November 2008, 22:03

Can't say I'm suprised, but I am outraged.

Furie # 26. November 2008, 23:00

Oh for god's sake! This was murder plain and bloody simple.

Quinnuendo # 26. November 2008, 23:01

Ah such a problem.

It does sound like a technicality, but unfortunately, like the article says, if she was found guilty, it would a precedent which would mean anyone who violated a user agreement. Hell, it ain't fair. This behaviour should be punished, but there aren't good enough laws. And it's hard to prove what was in one's mind when one did something.

But the mob is already taking things in their hands. Which is also kinda problematic. ugh.

Furie # 26. November 2008, 23:12

For once, the mob and I agree.

Quinnuendo # 26. November 2008, 23:27

That's why I said "kinda problematic". I mean it seems like the right thing to harras the woman. She probably has it coming, even if she was just dumb and not really aware of what she was doing (which is doubtfull).
But it won't stop there. As you could have read in the article linked, the people are already attacking anyone who worked with her. And for sure someone will attack her family, which is quite questionable.

The mob should never decide on anything.

noah counte # 27. November 2008, 02:44

Mobs have bad judgment, particularly when it comes to stopping.

Shaunak # 27. November 2008, 06:29

Just goes to show that law loopholes and a god lawer can even squash natural justice.

This is plain wrong.

noah counte # 27. November 2008, 06:36

I think it's more indicative of the fact that the law hasn't caught up with technology. It just wasn't written for that kind of cyber-bullying.

Tabmartel # 27. November 2008, 14:05

What about the recent situation involving an Eastern Ottawa woman, who was babysitting children, only she had these young babies locked in a basement "cell" all day long. No lighting, no food, nothing to drink, and urinating in corners. Without any sort of conscience.

The judge determined that she had been punished enough by the local media exposure.

WTF????
I would have tossed in a room, and thrown the room away.

Quinnuendo # 27. November 2008, 17:41

Now Tab's story sound like a silly judge in question.
That was wrong, and I pretty sure there are clear laws about keeping children locked up.

Anyway, the laws are totaly not up to date to all the cyber crime out there... Plus you need trained people to run those cases, who understand what happened, and how to treat the cases.
This here was a problematic situation, where they tried to punish someone who deserves it with all the posible laws they have, since they don't have any that applies directly.

Horrible. There is no thing in the world that can't be missused.