Cyber Bullying and sending people to Prison :ugh:

6SpeedTA95 · 11-20-2007, 09:04 PM

After Megan Meier committed suicide because of an incident on MySpace, Dardenne Prairie, MO is proposing an ordinance for child endangerment and Internet harassment.
Where Is The Line?
How far can people go before what is said on the Internet falls under the definition of harassment? Megan’s parents would like to know the answer to that question. Their daughter is dead because of a hoax.

Josh Evans, The Hoax
A family down the street would like to monitor what your child says about their child on MySpace. Solution? Create a fake personality. Josh Evans began communicating with Megan as an entrapment hoax to find out what Megan would say about a neighbor girl. Josh was not created by a12-year-old. He was the fictional creation of an adult and neighbor down the street.

Fictional Personality
Josh’s profile was that of someone new to the community, formerly lived in Florida, 14-years-old, cute, and home-schooled. Josh’s family also did not have a telephone yet. He now had a reason for not appearing at school or calling Megan, which would have revealed that he was not a boy at all. In fact, he didn’t exist. For over a month the created illusion called Josh was Megan’s "friend" on MySpace.

About Megan
Megan was a 13-year-old on MySpace where the age for posting a webpage on the site is 14-years-old. MySpace does not enforce the age limitation. She also suffered from depression and attention deficit disorder or ADD. Megan had been on medication but her relationship with Josh had a positive effect on her. She was quite upbeat until the relationship suddenly ended.

I Don't Like You Any More
After about six weeks of friendship, Josh Evans, who was really the neighbor down the street, suddenly told Megan that he couldn’t be her friend anymore because he had heard she was cruel. This shattered the depressed and impulsive girl. She ran upstairs and hung herself. Her parents rushed her to the hospital where she died the next day.

The following day Megan’s father, Ron, found a message from Josh on Megan’s computer. "You are a bad person and the world would be better without you." Did this sentence push Megan over the edge to suicide? Who wrote the sentence? That is being investigated. Three individuals monitored the fictional MySpace site: the neighbor, her daughter and a third party.

Police Involvement
When Megan’s parents called the police they were told that while what was written to their daughter was vile, it was not covered by current laws. Mayor Pam Fogarty is trying to change that. The city has proposed a new ordinance that would cover Internet harassment.

Hoax Results
This sick joke has left a teenager dead and her parents separated. This occurred because a mother down the street wanted to know what a girl was saying about her daughter. If that was the true intent, why say the world would be better off without you? Perhaps, the time has come for cyber-bullying to be illegal. The Meiers continue to hope that criminal charges can be filed under a federal law passed in January 2006 that prohibits online harassment.

Internet Harassment Is Legal?: A Missouri Town Is Making Cyber-Bullying a Criminal Offense

This is a tragic and terribly sad story. However, putting people in prison is just outrageous. If someone is "cyber bullying" you, log the F out. Change screen names. There is a million things a user/individual can do to avoid cyber bullying. This notion of sending a kid or an adult for that matter to prison over something that was said in a chat room or via messenger or my space is absolutely assenine.

Am I wrong here?

northhunter · 11-20-2007, 09:26 PM

I would think this is the perfect situation for a civil lawsuit. The girls parents can hold the people resonsible for this hoax and make it cost enough so it will get others attention hopefully.

6SpeedTA95 · 11-20-2007, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by northhunter

I would think this is the perfect situation for a civil lawsuit. The girls parents can hold the people resonsible for this hoax and make it cost enough so it will get others attention hopefully.

I would say this is a perfect case for exploring this issue.

Kid on Kid cyber bullying I would say is definately not worth prison...

This case however is very interesting. Because you have a mother who helped her daughter make a fake account to spy on her former friend. From what I've read it was the mother talking to this other child. The mother eventually told this child that the world would be better off without her, etc etc etc.

Which obviously is not murder but an adult KNOWINGLY saying those things to a child seems to be very reckless.

JaJae · 11-21-2007, 12:57 AM

The person wasn't cyber-bullying though. An adult made a false internet persona to prey on a minor. I believe they knew about her medical condition and how unstable she was.

Whether or not they should be held responsible I think should correlate with the laws regarding doing the same thing in person.

7960 · 11-21-2007, 01:32 AM

"You are a bad person and the world would be better without you."

Mayor Pam Fogarty is trying to change that. The city has proposed a new ordinance that would cover Internet harassment.

I could walk up to that mayor or her child and say "You are a bad person and the world would be better without you" and it would not be harassment.

What is it about being posted online that would suddenly make it harassment?

6SpeedTA95 · 11-21-2007, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by 7960

I could walk up to that mayor or her child and say "You are a bad person and the world would be better without you" and it would not be harassment.

What is it about being posted online that would suddenly make it harassment?

Well you're raising an excellent point. However, its not a one time incident. This ADULT gained a childs trust and then proceeded to tell them how worthless they were. An ADULT that did this under a FAKE name none the less.

I'm not sure what should happen here. This "cyber bullying" seems downright retarded to me but I do think its worth a discussion...

7960 · 11-21-2007, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Well you're raising an excellent point. However, its not a one time incident.

So we'll pretend it was a conversation in real life.

If I walked up to your child and had a conversation it wouldn't be illegal (odd/strange/creepy but not illegal). If I talked to him/her every day and we became friends it wouldn't be illegal (again, odd/strange/creepy but not illegal). If one day I said "I don't want to be your friend any more. You are a bad person and the world would be better without you"..........all the sudden is that harassment? (no)

I'm not sure what should happen here. This "cyber bullying" seems downright retarded to me but I do think its worth a discussion...

So do I. I think the discussion should be around allowing children unrestricted and unmonitored access to the internet.

WickedLou9 · 11-21-2007, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by 7960

So we'll pretend it was a conversation in real life.

If I walked up to your child and had a conversation it wouldn't be illegal (odd/strange/creepy but not illegal). If I talked to him/her every day and we became friends it wouldn't be illegal (again, odd/strange/creepy but not illegal). If one day I said "I don't want to be your friend any more. You are a bad person and the world would be better without you"..........all the sudden is that harassment? (no)

So do I. I think the discussion should be around allowing children unrestricted and unmonitored access to the internet.

It seems like it was alot more than just a one time insult. The other person was actively trying to make the other persons life a living hell. IF that happened in real life it would be stalking or harrasment or something of that nature. I don't really think they need a distiction for cyber this and cyber that. It's not different. If I harras you over the phone, in person, on the internet, or snail mail. It's harrasment.

6SpeedTA95 · 11-21-2007, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by 7960

So we'll pretend it was a conversation in real life.

If I walked up to your child and had a conversation it wouldn't be illegal (odd/strange/creepy but not illegal). If I talked to him/her every day and we became friends it wouldn't be illegal (again, odd/strange/creepy but not illegal). If one day I said "I don't want to be your friend any more. You are a bad person and the world would be better without you"..........all the sudden is that harassment? (no)

So do I. I think the discussion should be around allowing children unrestricted and unmonitored access to the internet.

If you did it repeatedly wouldn't it be harrassment and in the case of a child that may already be slightly unstable mentally wouldn't that be child endangerment?

Again I'm asking legitimately here as I'm not quite sure how I feel on this particular case. I feel cyber bullying in general is a crock of shit...but this seems to perhaps be an exception

7960 · 11-21-2007, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

It seems like it was alot more than just a one time insult. The other person was actively trying to make the other persons life a living hell.

I just read the article again. I can only find references to two insults and/or offensive things said.

IF that happened in real life it would be stalking or harrasment or something of that nature. I don't really think they need a distiction for cyber this and cyber that. It's not different. If I harras you over the phone, in person, on the internet, or snail mail. It's harrasment.

This is true. Jay Severin had a thing about date rape...he said it trivializes the offense and I agree. One of the things he said is "we don't have date arson or date robbery, why treat the situation differently if she knew the guy or didn't?"

Stalking and/or harassment are stalking/harassment. "Cyber-" whatever is crap. A law exists...use it.

7960 · 11-21-2007, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

If you did it repeatedly wouldn't it be harrassment and in the case of a child that may already be slightly unstable mentally wouldn't that be child endangerment?

Again, the article says it happened at most twice. Maybe it was ongoing, I'm not sure, but the article doesn't say that.

Again I'm asking legitimately here as I'm not quite sure how I feel on this particular case. I feel cyber bullying in general is a crock of shit...but this seems to perhaps be an exception

It's not an exception. *IF* it was harassment then it was. "Cyber-" means nothing.

6SpeedTA95 · 11-21-2007, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

Again, the article says it happened at most twice. Maybe it was ongoing, I'm not sure, but the article doesn't say that.

It's not an exception. *IF* it was harassment then it was. "Cyber-" means nothing.

I think thats correct, the harassment took place twice. The ongoing conversation took place over a course of weeks.

7960 · 11-21-2007, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I think thats correct, the harassment took place twice. The ongoing conversation took place over a course of weeks.

like you, I'm asking.........can you say it's harassment if it only happens twice?

6SpeedTA95 · 11-21-2007, 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

like you, I'm asking.........can you say it's harassment if it only happens twice?

In the case of an adult knowingly harassing a child? Yeah I think so...

7960 · 11-21-2007, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

In the case of an adult knowingly harassing a child? Yeah I think so...

I disagree.

Stylerod · 11-21-2007, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

I disagree.

But it wasn't really twice. It was for weeks (months?). They were prepping her for a HUGE fall. Yes, they only said bad things to her twice, but they spent a long time preparing her for the biggest fall they could get.

nbiggershaft · 11-21-2007, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

So do I. I think the discussion should be around allowing children unrestricted and unmonitored access to the internet.

That wasn't at all the case here though. The let her have a myspace for a birthday present. The parents had direct supervision and even called some cyber-crimes division before their child killed herself because they suspected something was fishy.

I don't agree with 'cyber-bully' laws but in this case you have an adult talking to a minor under false pretenses. It seems like their should be all sorts of laws we're skirting with.

If I convinced someone's kid to kill themselves in person, I doubt it would be overlooked.

7960 · 11-21-2007, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

But it wasn't really twice. It was for weeks (months?). They were prepping her for a HUGE fall. Yes, they only said bad things to her twice, but they spent a long time preparing her for the biggest fall they could get.

But if it was done verbally IMO it wouldn't have been harassment so I don't think it should be just because it happened online.

7960 · 11-21-2007, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

The parents ... even called some cyber-crimes division ... because they suspected something was fishy.

And if I suspected something was fishy I would have cut off access. I've already done it with my 8 year old*. I wouldn't hesitate to do it with my child who was so depressed she had to be medicated.

*yes, my 8 year old goes on the internet to a very specific white list of sites. One of them changed so is off the list. I noticed the change because I very closely monitor the sites he's allowed to visit and one of them had a link to a site he wouldn't have been able to get to, but the text of the link was enough to get that site removed. And yes I sent a message to the site's admin letting him know he had rude/crude words on what was supposed to be a kid's (kids' ?) website.