That is a gross assumption of epic proportion.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Prosecutors Seeking Prison Time In MySpace Case
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
That is a gross assumption of epic proportion.
Why would a girl let her myspace profile become her entire world? Was she homeschooled? Didn't have any real life friends? No family life? She was weak enough to take her own life because she had a skewed perspective on life. According to news articles they were ONLINE dating for a few weeks, then one day the boy left a message saying he didn't want to go out. Shortly after that multiple users sent messages on her board saying she's a slut and a whore and whatnot. She then calls her parents to tell them whats going on, later that night she storms up to her room. Did the parents take action by monitoring her site and making sure her profile was private and she deleted these users that were harassing her? No, they let her cry in her room until she eventually hanged herself.
I definitely agree with that too! Where were the parents during this whole thing?
There's an important fact that many of you are missing.
The mother was not the one who initially made the account.
The mother wasn't the only one sending messages.
There were several other, YOUNGER parties involved, the mother was knowledgeable about the what was happening.
The victim also told her own mother about what happened and her own mother didn't take action, well of course until it's too late and she's missing a daughter.
The mother was not the one who initially made the account.
The mother wasn't the only one sending messages.
There were several other, YOUNGER parties involved, the mother was knowledgeable about the what was happening.
The victim also told her own mother about what happened and her own mother didn't take action, well of course until it's too late and she's missing a daughter.
Wrong. The parents were plenty involved in trying to control her online usage.
Quote:
"After telling her mother, Tina Meier, about the increasing number of hurtful messages, the two got into an argument over the vulgar language Meier used in response to the messages and the fact that she did not log off when her mother told her to.[14] After the argument, Meier ran upstairs to her room. She was found twenty minutes later, hanging by the neck in a closet.[7] Despite attempts to revive her,[24] she was pronounced dead the following day."
Tricky2ufellow
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 213
Not if they convict her!
Later on in the post you quoted, I used the term psychological warfare. If you think that only physical attacks cause damage and imply responsibility on the perpetrator, than you are naive.
There are many ways to use force other than physical attack and those who use psychological warfare against others are just as responsible for their actions as those who attack someone on the street with a brick.
spacetrader
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2008
- Messages
- 2,681
im confused... what beef would an adult mother have with some neighbor's 13 year old kid? enough to impersonate someone and roleplay for that long? this doesnt even make sense....
This simply isn't black and white as many perceive it to be. The legal system is not rock hard solid, and jurors normally don't have a background in criminal law. Charismatic lawyers and witnesses can be truly compelling.
What the law does look for is whether the crime was premeditated or malicious, and if they are, a harder sentence is given.
Jakalwarrior
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,189
Give it up, they just aren't able to understand the seriousness of mental abuse. I guess you can't expect everyone to have an understanding of psychology, but mental damage wise there isn't much difference between physical and mental abuse. A lot would even say mental is worse.
I won't say the parents have no blame. They do. But part of being an adult is taking responsibility for your actions. If this is not illegal, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of internet trolls start taking this up as some sort of a "sport".
This wasn't one afternoon, or one comment. This was a well planned, well thought out, emotional attack. I don't think the kid should have killed themselves. I don't think the adult should be directly blamed for the death as in murder 1. However, their actions directly caused emotional harm to a child DIRECTLY resulting in the childs death.
I think people are missing completely the whole point of why this is important and it directly effects each and every one of you. And the entire online world had better pay close attention before it is too late.
Quick Question.... How many of you put in your Real actual name and address and phone number when registering on this forum? I don't see anyone using their real Names here. Every time you visit a Social Networking site, a Forum board or even a comment forum on a website, do you put in all your full correct Name, Address & phone number?
Well guess what! if you failed to put in your real name into even one site, according to the way the case is being prosecuted, you could be heading to Jail yourself!
That is what the case is, They are claiming the woman should go to jail because she put in a fake name when making an online profile. This is a hugely dangerous slope, you are taking some garbage TOS rules that somebody writes for their website and giving it the force of criminal law. So I could make a comment website for things and simply bury in the agreement that nobody reads, "You must use your real name and address to register your account". You put in a not real name and .... presto...how do you like them 3 years in Jail?
This is a classic case of how tragic cases get used to give the government unlimited power to trap anyone they want for anything, while yes the results of what happend were tragic, the government's case is way out of line and there should be no criminal charges for unauthorized computer access, in all the comments most seem to cheering the prosecution on and demanding even more harsh penalties way out of line with what the actual specifc thing they are bringing charges up for is.
This is why organizations dedicated to civil rights will seek to overturn convictions based on flawed prosecution even if the person was guilty of something, it protects us all from living in a police state where the FBI can come break down your door because your didn't use your real name on that last gaming forum.
Quick Question.... How many of you put in your Real actual name and address and phone number when registering on this forum? I don't see anyone using their real Names here. Every time you visit a Social Networking site, a Forum board or even a comment forum on a website, do you put in all your full correct Name, Address & phone number?
Well guess what! if you failed to put in your real name into even one site, according to the way the case is being prosecuted, you could be heading to Jail yourself!
That is what the case is, They are claiming the woman should go to jail because she put in a fake name when making an online profile. This is a hugely dangerous slope, you are taking some garbage TOS rules that somebody writes for their website and giving it the force of criminal law. So I could make a comment website for things and simply bury in the agreement that nobody reads, "You must use your real name and address to register your account". You put in a not real name and .... presto...how do you like them 3 years in Jail?
This is a classic case of how tragic cases get used to give the government unlimited power to trap anyone they want for anything, while yes the results of what happend were tragic, the government's case is way out of line and there should be no criminal charges for unauthorized computer access, in all the comments most seem to cheering the prosecution on and demanding even more harsh penalties way out of line with what the actual specifc thing they are bringing charges up for is.
This is why organizations dedicated to civil rights will seek to overturn convictions based on flawed prosecution even if the person was guilty of something, it protects us all from living in a police state where the FBI can come break down your door because your didn't use your real name on that last gaming forum.
dr.stevil
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2008
- Messages
- 9,267
it's a lot worse IMO
bruses and bones heal.... emotional scars usually do not. Anyone bullied as a kid could probably agree with that
I'll make my position clear. I do not approve of HOW they are prosecuting the adult. However, I do believe the adult should be held accountable. If I had to choose between the adult walking and the way they are charging her, I'd rather she walked.
Monkey34
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2003
- Messages
- 5,140
The more time the better.
I can't say I agree with the lady being punished at all. I will say that whatever sentence she gets, the parents of the deceased should serve it right along side her. If you can't tell that your daughter is in such a deep state of emotional distress that she would kill herself at the whim of a person she had never met, then you should be jailed for neglect!
So wait. This quote puts the parents at blame, not the other woman. That solidifies my opinion even more.
True.
Don't internet trolls do this already?
I'm pretty sure prosecutors are not going to spend time and money charging someone only because they did not fill out truthful information for a forum. Now, if something was done on these forums like harassment, or theft, sure it should be taken up and it would be an additional charge. But very rarely will it be a charge on its own so unless you are out to break the law and get into court, you probably don't have to be worried.
As far as I can tell too, the dead girl isn't on trial. It is the mothers actions that are on trial. While the girl is obviously not right in the head, she again is not on trail. It is the actions of the mother that are.
If you don't have anything to hide....? Really?
Well, don't get me wrong, one way or another someone needs to flog the hell outta this wench. But, it all comes down to wether or not her behavior was breaking the law. Just going by my own moral compass I don't see any problem at all w/ throwing 3 years at her. She's a damn 40 y/o woman socially predating children, I mean, dubyateeF? However, my moral compass is irrelevant. She either broke the law, as written on the books, or not. The only way i can see they'd be trying to go with this is manslaughter, which is prob. a little complicated here. In a typical case of manslaughter, the victim is not choosing to die themselves. They die as a result of events out of their control, brought on by the other persons negligence. In this case the girl chose to kill herself, however, she is also a child. So can a child be held responsible for the decision to take their own life?
It looks to me, legally anyway, that it's kind of a convoluted situation. Morally? Yeah, one way or another, I'm sure someone will be giving this lady a serious ass whoopin.
It looks to me, legally anyway, that it's kind of a convoluted situation. Morally? Yeah, one way or another, I'm sure someone will be giving this lady a serious ass whoopin.
Freakin wannabe child molesters. The lady knew that Megan was suicidal. Her daughter and Megan were friends at one point. She provoked the child into committing suicide.
Harrassment is a crime.
Wait till the civil cases come, libel and slander will be the winning points. Even if that lady doesn't spend a day in jail, she will owe Megan's family the rest of her life.
If you yell for someone to jump from a bridge, you are just as guilty for helping to kill them.
Besides, she was convicted of ignoring the TOS. Something that is new to Judicial Law.
Harrassment is a crime.
Wait till the civil cases come, libel and slander will be the winning points. Even if that lady doesn't spend a day in jail, she will owe Megan's family the rest of her life.
If you yell for someone to jump from a bridge, you are just as guilty for helping to kill them.
Besides, she was convicted of ignoring the TOS. Something that is new to Judicial Law.
JUSTJOEL73
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 669
None of us have seen all the eveidence so we are really not in the best position to judge this woman, but if what has been released to the public is all true, then this woman intentionally caused a 13 yr old girl emotional harm unintentionally resulting in her suicide. For me, this just brings to mind Silence of the Lambs where Hannibal talks his fellow inmate into killing himself. I would say her crime is on par with that of a drug dealer selling to a child. Yes the dealer is selling something that will intentionally harm the health of the addict but does not actually intend to cause the death of the addict beacuse 99.99% of the time the addict will survive. As an, adult she should have known what she was doing was wrong and could have more far reaching consequences. If the number of years she serves in prison could bring the girl back then she should serve as long as required, however this is not the case. What is the purpose of jail time for her? To rehabilitate her? To deter her or others from the same actions? Punishment? If you feel you have to deter others and punish her, then 3 yrs is all you can met out according to the laws she has been found to have broken. That in my opinion is fair. I hate wrongful death civilsuits in general because it puts a price on human life and to me cheapens it.
lol....
All good and well for you to think it will never be abused now, but what happens if you disagree with some goverment agency and they want to silence you? or you say some facts about some corporation or their products that they don't appreciate and decide to try to silence you, do you really trust big corporations or governments to never abuse their power to silence critics? The right to anonymous free speech is often the difference between free speech and none, at least when you don't have millions of dollars worth of lawyers or badges and guns on your side.
If someone catches you on video yelling for their loved one to jump, they do and die, I guarantee that you will end up on civil court and stand a far superior chance of losing....
That is definately a good ponit, but pretty skewed while being applied here. First Amendment rights for free speech, of course, but that doesn't mean you can say anything. Free speech does not protect you from screaming "fire" in a crowded movie threater or let you slander or harass someone. There are limitations, and in this case, this woman was clearly well past that limitation. She also isn't on trail due to Free Speech.
3 years, that is the maximum sentence for the crimes she was charged for. If I was charged for a single count of this and solely because I did not fill in my forum account information, will I get the maximum sentence? Probably not.
Civil isn't Criminal.
You can be in Civil court for not picking up your newspapers on the front lawn. Criminals is a lot different.
Yup. Criminal be beyond a reasonable doubt, civil doesn't live up to this vigorious standard. As she already lost her criminal case, and a successful appeal seems doubtful, it looks pretty reasonable she will lose her civil trial. OJ was found not guilt in criminal court, not beyond a reasonable doubt, but he lost in civil court and was charged millions.
To those of you who think this woman "did nothing wrong"... you are sick heartless bastards! However, that is simply a description of a mental condition, or a series of mental problems, that preclude you from being able to distinguish right from wrong. There is simply no way for this woman to justify what she did, and I only hope that while she is incarcerated she gets competent professional help. (I'm just not sure that will happen!)
Will Rogers once commented there are three kinds of people: those who learn by reading, those who learn by observation, and "the rest" who have to piss on the electric fence and find out for themselves. Hopefully some of you can move "up" from the third category into the second, and learn from this woman's lack of good judgment. Because although our society doesn't always try to protect adults from other adults, it does not tolerate adults "abusing" children in any way.
Will Rogers once commented there are three kinds of people: those who learn by reading, those who learn by observation, and "the rest" who have to piss on the electric fence and find out for themselves. Hopefully some of you can move "up" from the third category into the second, and learn from this woman's lack of good judgment. Because although our society doesn't always try to protect adults from other adults, it does not tolerate adults "abusing" children in any way.
Did I say guilty in criminal court? You are morally (and be found legally in civil court) guilty.
Let me quote you. You said civil.
Now while you want to argue, I should point out that you mentioned a video, which is a documented proof beyond reasonable doubt.... the mother her is more of a case of hearsay as there is no documented proof that she wanted the teen to die.
The problem here is that again you completely miss the point of why your own rights are in danger. She is NOT being charged for any statements made to someone else or any taunts to someone or anything like that at all. She is ONLY being sentenced on the action of not putting a real name when she made a profile on an online website. So yes she should be prosecuted for attacking someone else online, being cruel and intentonally causing pain and hurt, and yes by all means bring charges for that. But to ignore that and use twisted logic to use something that should not be a crime to charge someone for something because you want to get them for something else opens up a huge highway for abuse.
The woman should be charged with involuntary manslaughter. With or without intent, her actions were irrational, and as a result gave the child the drive to commit suicide (based on media's take on this).
It seems wrong to charge someone for years for a "prank" but if someone did something like that to my kid, or any "prank" that caused them the want to commit suicide, I would want them to be charged. It's not like she was a 12 year old prank calling. She was falsely impersonating a child to gain the trust of another child to manipulate her thoughts. It worked.
It seems wrong to charge someone for years for a "prank" but if someone did something like that to my kid, or any "prank" that caused them the want to commit suicide, I would want them to be charged. It's not like she was a 12 year old prank calling. She was falsely impersonating a child to gain the trust of another child to manipulate her thoughts. It worked.
So because we don't allow our emotions to rule our rational mind, we are sick heartless bastards? What this women did may have been wrong on an emotional level, but where does it end? If I go kill myself because you called me a sick heartless bastard are you responsible for my death? This type of ruling seems like a slippery slope to what I believe society shouldn't become.
So all irrational people should be jailed?
Keep in mind, the girls parents fought with her and she died 20 minutes later when she stormed off to her room from the argument with her parents and herself.
So actually, you would be responsible
