A Missouri woman has been charged for her part in an internet hoax that resulted in the death of a 13 year old girl. The woman, 49 year old Lori Drew, was one of several people who pretended to be a “lovestruck” sixteen year old boy named Josh Evans in order to toy with a 13 year old girl, Megan Meier.
Apparently the woman had a falling out with Megan, and decided to take her vengeance in the way of a “MySpace Romance”. After several months of having a “relationship” with Meier, Lori Drew broke off the relationship and told the 13 year old that the world would be “better off without her”.
Make no mistake, this is horrendous. A moral atrocity has certainly taken place here, and I have nothing but contempt for the woman who did something like this. The family of Megan must be distraught, and I can see how they would want to take revenge on her through the courts.
However, I am persuaded to believe that Lori Drew is guilty of no crime. She is being charged with “accessing a protected computer to obtain information”, something she clearly did not do. This charge is usually used when someone hacks onto a government or military computer, and she did not.
First of all, the internet is not “owned” by any one country, so we’re already on unstable ground by having this trial in US courts. Second, you can’t really criminally charge someone for pretending to be someone they’re not, or for taunting a girlt his way via the internet. As horrible as this is going to sound, it’s called suicide because the person chose to do it.
Lori Drews did not kill Megan Meier.
Maybe if Al Gore had gotten off his ass and invented the internet sooner, like when America’s founding fathers were drafting their consitution, this wouldn’t be such a grey area. As it is, there is no way Drew is guilty.
Surecure wrote:
I’m not sure about the internet aspect, and I think the prosecutors are walking a thin and dangerous line that they could lose the case over. But, certain states do have criminal statutes regarding the solicitation of suicide, something this woman could most certainly be charged under.
Seems to me, if they wanted to prosecute this woman, they have laws they can use. No need to go on a fishing expedition with internet lingo that no juror is gong to be able to follow.
Posted on 15-May-08 at 11:04 pm | Permalink
Hunter wrote:
An adult encouraging a minor to commit suicide is a crime, have you ever heard of bullies? This woman was a bully, posing as a teenage boy, she was directly responsible for causing a teen to take her life. I don’t care what statute or law they use, that woman needs to do some jail time.
Posted on 15-May-08 at 11:26 pm | Permalink
Crazymamma wrote:
They may not have a law for it but I agree this woman acted like a bully and a con artist. What the hell was she thinking? I’ll never get it, then to complain because the neighborhood shunned her after the word got out what she did, this woman is a evil piece of work and needs some sort of jail time/comeuppance. Frankly, for me, waiting for Karma to kick in will not do it in this case.
Posted on 16-May-08 at 4:59 am | Permalink
Charles Anthony wrote:
Shunning can be worse than karma. I propose the following “punishment” for Lori Drew: publish her name, photograph, address and the details of her actions.
Technically, no crime has been committed but so what? What constitutes a “crime” is often very arbitrary. There are tons of “crimes” in Saudi Arabia and Talibania that would not be crimes here in North America and vice versa.
I have spent a lot of time thinking about this case and it is challenging because it overlaps morality with legality. You are right when you say “Lori Drews did not kill Megan Meier. but I say: Wo what?
I can understand a parent supervizing her child’s online activity but this Lori Drew is twisted. [I also believe that she is evil too. She most certainly is a bad influence.] I can not imagine what type of twisted mind this mother has to have gone so far meddling in her daughter’s affairs. I thought my parents were exceedingly nosy when it came to my friends — I guess I was lucky!
AdD,
The first thing that occurred to me when I read your post was that all of the actors were female.
Congreve
Erasmus
Posted on 20-May-08 at 9:55 am | Permalink
Chad Wolke wrote:
I believe that this is an extreme case of slander. Even though it was NOT a false statement made to hurt someones reputation, it most caused the death of someone. Regardless of age.
However, I also believe that the death of the 13-year old girl is partly to blame on her parents. They should be monitering her actions online and monitering her behavior. She MUST have slumped into depression before committing suicide.
As for the 49-year old woman, in a book I am writing, I talk about immature adults in the first chapter and she is a prime example. A prank every once in a while is fine. However, taking it so far as to urge a 13-year old to kill herself is too far.
If the woman is not jailed for slander (or a similar crime), she should be put behind bars for pure stupidity.
Posted on 11-Jun-08 at 7:16 pm | Permalink