Lori Drew was the adult woman who pretended to be a 16 year old boy online in order to torment her daughter's 13 year old friend. The target of the abuse later committed suicide and the story was a staple of cable news and daytime talk for a few weeks. And languish of course.
In a worrisome development, a federal criminal case was brought against Drew under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, on a legal theory that essentially would have criminalized the deliberate violation of a website's terms of service. Drew was actually convicted by a federal jury but last month the judge indicated that he was going to toss the jury verdict on legal grounds. The judge finally issued the written ruling today, and as expected, it finds the theory of prosecution to be untenable.
As I recall, that case was the poster child for the crack-brained legislature to include "cyberbullying" in the penal code. Want to place any wagers on what'll happen with that?
I have no idea what is going on in the legislatures but any kind of criminal law of that sort is going to have to be carefully drafted to pass constitutional muster.
While the defendent in the case appears to be scum that deserves to be in prision, the legal theory that allowed the federal case to go forward was really stupid, so I'm glad the judge tossed it. He really shouldn't have allowed it to come to trial in the first place, IMO.
Just a general question: is encouraging someone to commit suicide a crime?
Quote from: DGuller on September 01, 2009, 10:30:08 AM
Just a general question: is encouraging someone to commit suicide a crime?
It is in some states. for example it is a felony in California.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 01, 2009, 10:51:11 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 01, 2009, 10:30:08 AM
Just a general question: is encouraging someone to commit suicide a crime?
It is in some states. for example it is a felony in California.
YEAH! So you guys better stop telling me to go shoot myself. :P
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 01, 2009, 10:51:11 AM
It is in some states. for example it is a felony in California.
So why didn't she get charged for that, instead of some creative idiocy that she was charged with?
Quote from: DGuller on September 01, 2009, 10:57:57 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 01, 2009, 10:51:11 AM
It is in some states. for example it is a felony in California.
So why didn't she get charged for that, instead of some creative idiocy that she was charged with?
Lori Drew doesn't live in California, nor did the victim, for starters.
Quote from: Jaron on September 01, 2009, 10:53:42 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 01, 2009, 10:51:11 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 01, 2009, 10:30:08 AM
Just a general question: is encouraging someone to commit suicide a crime?
It is in some states. for example it is a felony in California.
YEAH! So you guys better stop telling me to go shoot myself. :P
I don't think California has any jurisdiction over what non-residents say on the 'net.
Quote from: ulmont on September 01, 2009, 10:59:44 AM
Lori Drew doesn't live in California, nor did the victim, for starters.
It says she did in the first sentence of the first post in this thread. Is JR mistaken?
Quote from: DGuller on September 01, 2009, 11:05:27 AM
Quote from: ulmont on September 01, 2009, 10:59:44 AM
Lori Drew doesn't live in California, nor did the victim, for starters.
It says she did in the first sentence of the first post in this thread. Is JR mistaken?
As usual.
Quote from: DGuller on September 01, 2009, 11:05:27 AM
Quote from: ulmont on September 01, 2009, 10:59:44 AM
Lori Drew doesn't live in California, nor did the victim, for starters.
It says she did in the first sentence of the first post in this thread. Is JR mistaken?
yes.
fixed.
Quote from: Jaron on September 01, 2009, 10:53:42 AM
YEAH! So you guys better stop telling me to go shoot myself. :P
No one here would ever do that. We may encourage you to make sure your gun is functioning properly by looking down the barrel when you fire it but that's only to ensure the safety of the gun for use by making sure there are no obstructions in the barrel.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 01, 2009, 11:03:53 AM
I don't think California has any jurisdiction over what non-residents say on the 'net.
Well not being a Cali-called lawyer I can not state this with 100% certainty, but I am 99.999% sure you are wrong.
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 11:44:02 AM
Well not being a Cali-called lawyer I can not state this with 100% certainty, but I am 99.999% sure you are wrong.
Seriously? We can be charged with breaking California law sitting at home? That's bullshit if true.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 01, 2009, 11:46:39 AM
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 11:44:02 AM
Well not being a Cali-called lawyer I can not state this with 100% certainty, but I am 99.999% sure you are wrong.
Seriously? We can be charged with breaking California law sitting at home? That's bullshit if true.
I guess if the server is in cali land then the law was technically broken in california. that's the only example i can think of
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 01, 2009, 11:46:39 AM
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 11:44:02 AM
Well not being a Cali-called lawyer I can not state this with 100% certainty, but I am 99.999% sure you are wrong.
Seriously? We can be charged with breaking California law sitting at home? That's bullshit if true.
Think about it. If you hack into a Cali-based computer and steal money, you have committed a crime in California. Also in your home jurisdiction. You can be charged in either place.
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 11:49:38 AM
Think about it. If you hack into a Cali-based computer and steal money, you have committed a crime in California. Also in your home jurisdiction. You can be charged in either place.
Being true doesn't make it less ridiculous.
Quote from: HVC on September 01, 2009, 11:49:27 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 01, 2009, 11:46:39 AM
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 11:44:02 AM
Well not being a Cali-called lawyer I can not state this with 100% certainty, but I am 99.999% sure you are wrong.
Seriously? We can be charged with breaking California law sitting at home? That's bullshit if true.
I guess if the server is in cali land then the law was technically broken in california. that's the only example i can think of
That was the reason for this prosecution in California, yes; the myspace servers were unauthorizedly accessed (according to the government theory of the case) in California.
Quote from: Jaron on September 01, 2009, 10:53:42 AM
YEAH! So you guys better stop telling me to go shoot myself. :P
Jaron, go be careless with your physical safety.
...Not quite the same ring to it. :P
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 01, 2009, 11:54:28 AM
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 11:49:38 AM
Think about it. If you hack into a Cali-based computer and steal money, you have committed a crime in California. Also in your home jurisdiction. You can be charged in either place.
Being true doesn't make it less ridiculous.
Why?
There's lots of examples where the criminal is physically located in one jurisdiction, and the victim is in the other. Imagine sending a mail bomb. The victim is in one spot, the criminal in the other. Why should the criminal only be prosecuted in the place most convenient for him?
This is not a new principle at all. It's just with the internet it's much easier to cross jurisdictions than ever before.
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 12:39:36 PM
Why?
People who aren't living in or visiting California shouldn't be expected to know California law. The internet should be purely federal jurisdiction.
So if the age of consent is 14 in Arkansas and 18 in CA, should FB be able to go online and have hot cybers with 15 year olds in California ??? Is that what you're advocating?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 01, 2009, 12:43:42 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 12:39:36 PM
Why?
People who aren't living in or visiting California shouldn't be expected to know California law. The internet should be purely federal jurisdiction.
That would be a massive expansion of federal jurisdiction. :mellow:
The same principle also holds true in dealing with international jurisdictions. If you commit a crime in Canada via the internet you can be charged in Canada, even if you've never stepp foot outside of your parents basement.
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 12:46:29 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 01, 2009, 12:43:42 PM
People who aren't living in or visiting California shouldn't be expected to know California law. The internet should be purely federal jurisdiction.
That would be a massive expansion of federal jurisdiction. :mellow:
Not really. The Lori Drew trial was in fact federal based on the interstate nature of the Internet, and Congress could preempt any state regulation (including relevant criminal proceedings) of the Internet if it so desired.
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 12:46:29 PM
The same principle also holds true in dealing with international jurisdictions. If you commit a crime in Canada via the internet you can be charged in Canada, even if you've never stepp foot outside of your parents basement.
Classy. <_<
Yeah, this happened with that hacker dude that stole credit card info from companies like TJ Maxx and Heartland Payment Systems. He committed the crimes from his home in Florida but was charged in Massachusetts for the former and New Jersey for the latter.
Quote from: Barrister on September 01, 2009, 11:49:38 AM
Think about it. If you hack into a Cali-based computer and steal money, you have committed a crime in California. Also in your home jurisdiction. You can be charged in either place.
Interstate crimes are under federal jurisdiction. IIRC, federal judges can choose to hear state offenses in interstate cases, but are under no legal obligation to do so; in practice, the plaintiff's state of origin, defendant's state, and the federal judge have to come to agreement on charges in interstate crimes, when it comes to state felony charges.