Judge Likely To Exclude Evidence Of Suicide In Lori Drew Lawsuit
from the makes-at-least-some-sense dept
We've already pointed out how ridiculous it was that prosecutors charged Lori Drew with violating computer hacking laws. It was, quite clearly, a case where prosecutors were stretching the use of the law beyond its intention in order to file any charges in an emotionally-charged case. Drew, of course, is the woman who many people blame for the eventual suicide of teenager Megan Meier. Drew had created a fake MySpace account to see what Meier was saying about Drew's own daughter -- who had been friends with Meier. A few different people had access to the MySpace account, and eventually created a false persona of a boy who became friendly with Meier. In an effort to end things before it went too far, a friend of Drew's daughter tried to cut off conversation by being especially mean to Meier, which may have lead to her committing suicide. Meier's suicide is tragic, no doubt, but to go from there to charging Drew with computer hacking for creating a fake profile would set a very dangerous precedent. It could open up almost anyone to felony charges. No matter what you think of Drew or her actions, it's ridiculous to support this lawsuit.While the judge in the case decided not to dismiss the case, he apparently has decided that evidence of Meier's suicide will not be allowed in the case. This, at least, is a good decision. The lawsuit itself has nothing to do with the suicide, and allowing it to be used in front of a jury would likely lead to the same emotional response that resulted in the original charges being filed. Of course, with the case getting so much widespread publicity, you'd have to imagine that many jury members will already be familiar with what happened in the case.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: computer fraud, evidence, lori drew, megan meier
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
...is it a stretch?
- Gaining unauthorized access to a computer or network.
- Making something work beyond it's intended purpose.
Either of those fit. The use of a fake profile on myspace goes against the ToS (which I know isn't law). It is "unauthorized access to a network.
Also, the intended purpose of a myspace profile isn't for anything other than yourself...thus making it work beyond that.
Don't get me wrong...I'm not saying that making a fake profile on myspace and being a b**ch should be considered a felony...but is "hacking" really all that much of a stretch?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...is it a stretch?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ...is it a stretch?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ...is it a stretch?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ...is it a stretch?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ...is it a stretch?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...is it a stretch?
I hope you never sit on a jury (or get anywhere near a courtroom for that matter).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...is it a stretch?
"Making something work beyond it's intended purpose". Does that mean that you're a criminal if you hack the HTML in your profile - or does it just mean that you violated the TOS and you can get banned?
You have to use a little thought.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ...is it a stretch?
Lori Drew didn't make Myspace "work beyond its intended purpose", she created fake accounts with intent to, at the very least, defame Megan.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ...is it a stretch?
The fake persona "rejected" Megan as a girl friend when it started to go too far. If that was the purpose of the account I can't say. That's one reason to have the trial, some people think that was the only point and want her punished.
As far as I recall there weren't instances of the fake persona saying to all of Megan's friends that she was a "dumb whore" or anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ...is it a stretch
Gaining unauthorized access to a computer or network is NOT ONLY cracking. Cracking is a form of hacking. Does it matter if I pick the lock or break the window, either way...it's still breaking & entering.
...and neither of you have mentioned my second definition. Making something work beyond it's intended purpose (such as having an iPhone run on T-Mobile's network.)
As for the guy who says he never hopes I sit on a jury, that was really unnecessary. We're having a conversation here...this isn't Digg. Please refrain from snide remarks when your input isn't even really all that useful.
Thanks,
TriZz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ...is it a stretch
No. It's not even remotely the same.
Making a fake Myspace is as much hacking as the guy who 'hacked' into Sarah Palin's yahoo account.
They aren't in the same ballpark. It's not even the same fucking game!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...is it a stretch
But that's precisely why this is so alarming. The common perception might carry the day despite commonsense saying that would be a horrible idea on a level with drowning kittens and granting patents for ideas and concepts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'Joe Rider' isn't my real name
I think Lori Drew has paid a high enough consequence for her behavior...she has been forever branded, and will never be seen as a normal person again.
As for the original poster of "Is it a stretch" -- yes, that is a huge stretch of logic. If you have a valid user name and password, I wouldn't consider it to be "unauthorized access to a network." Maybe it is "falsifying information in order to gain access to a network" -- but certainly the existence of a valid user name and password is proof of authority to access said network.
Do you realize that part of every ToS is a phrase along the lines of "we may modify this agreement from time to time." Myspace's continues and says "Your continued use of the MySpace Service after MySpace posts a revised Agreement signifies your acceptance of the revised Agreement."
Are we really expected to read the ToS of everything we use ever time we use it to make sure the rules haven't changed? If we don't, we are in jeopardy of "unauthorized access to a network" by your logic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another idiot. Another waste of taxpayer money.
Instead, they're all "yeah, that'll teach the stupid bitch! Rot in hell!".
That is, until the law turns on them in the same manner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Another idiot. Another waste of taxpayer money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Leaving out the suicide part?
If the girl hadn't killed herself, no one would've cared about this incident. The only reason that Lori Drew is on trial is because of the end result. To leave that out of the court is removing the whole purpose for being there in the first place.
Am I wrong?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Leaving out the suicide part?
that is a highly emotional response. the actions leading up to the suicide are important. I.E. is signing up to a site with a false name illegal? among other things.
it sounds to me she should be tried for harrasment at best. but when you bring in the suicide you end up with emotional responses that follow the patter of "she did X and Y happened unexpectedly! it should be illegal to do X."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Leaving out the suicide part?
Is the judge going to demand that MySpace give all of the false names so they can face the same legal action? No, they won't, because it is harmless to create a false name.
Again, if they disconnect the suicide from the facts, there is no crime.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Leaving out the suicide part?
That's exactly the point. There IS NO CRIME.
What Drew (and apparently some other kids) did was mean, spiteful, and very, very wrong. But wrong is not necessarily illegal, and vice versa.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Leaving out the suicide part?
Under what law?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Leaving out the suicide part?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Leaving out the suicide part?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Leaving out the suicide part?
So you're saying driving drunk really should be legal so long as no one dies?
If its only wrong because she died then the logic behind it is questionable. Note: This is why you have attempted rape/assault/murder charges or even endangerment charges. It is more than safe to say that people trolling the internet don't know if someone will kill themselves. Some are callous enough to truly wish it, others if it actually happened would get sick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Leaving out the suicide part?
Driving Drunk is illegal. If you kill someone while doing it, then you charged with additional criminal counts (manslaughter, reckless endangerment, whatever...)
If driving while drunk was legal, then your comment would make sense, but it doesn't and so neither do you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Leaving out the suicide part?
That's like being on trial for forging checks - what you did with them (paying bills, feeding your kid, buying puppies to suffocate, etc.) has nothing to do with whether you did indeed forge the signature. You're not on trial for suffocating puppies, no matter how many people think you're a horrible person for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah, your right.. But who wants to defend Drew?
Bottom line, This is not going to bring Megan back. If dropping a sledge hammer on Drews head would bring Megan back I would be the first to say, "Drop away". I dont blame the parents for wanting some kind of revenge. I think most anyone in their place would do the same. But to look at Drew, it should be obvious the only thing she can break into is a bag of patato chips. If the parents are looking for revenge I dont think they are going to be satisfied with the results of this case. I think the parents understand they really are reaching on this one. But I doubt they care. And all I can say is, "Who can blame them"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yeah, your right.. But who wants to defend Drew?
Assuming you meant to say that you couldn't care less, I would say that this attitude is nothing short of pathetic. Are you actually saying that you think it's OK to twist the law in certain cases as long as it results in the verdict that you think is appropriate?
I would hope the courts would not make this case the precedent for all cases to follow if that happened.
That's what courts do; they use previous verdicts to set a precedent. That's why it's so important to have people who do care about the long term effects of the judicial system involved in it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
there has to be something else
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hacking? No.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
well..
Although the suicide is being left out, I've seen criminals charged with the most bizarre of harassment charges and yet they feel there is no case in that.. instead, they're grasping at straws.
In the end I don't think much will come of this. The woman's name will be slandered again, and I'm sure she feels pretty rotten in any case.
Creating a myspace account to pose as a lover to a 13 year old in the attempts to spy information out of her about your daughter to get the dirt (or the compliments?) about her is a LITTLE strange in my opinion. Might not be illegal, but it sure is strange.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lawyer rant on
Isn't this the only reason lawyers exist? To get the law twisted in such a way that they get the outcome they desire? If the law itself was clear and everyone understood it, there would be no need for lawyers (not that there is currently a real need for them, yes I'm biased), the people involved would walk into court, stand before the judge, explain what happened, one party would state that they screwed up and should have known better, the judge would decide an appropriate 'settlement' and the parties would go on their way.
"That's what courts do; they use previous verdicts to set a precedent. That's why it's so important to have people who do care about the long term effects of the judicial system involved in it."
As soon as we get some of those people who 'care about the long term effects of the judicial system' involved, we'll be alot better off than we currently are, because all I see are greedy money grubbing lawyers creating and fostering a hostile environment of litigation (and why not, they are the only ones who benefit regardless of the result of the litigation - the lawyers for the plaintiff and defendant both get paid regardless of the outcome, excluding ambulance chasers that work on a commission basis).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]