Thursday, May 15, 2008
INDICTMENT: And Lori Drew would have gotten away with it
If it weren't for the meddling with *MYSPACE*.
Although Missouri authorities declined to file charges against Drew for her participation/ approbation of a scheme to fool a child into revealing confidences to a Trojan Boy (a false internet persona created exclusively to reel her in and gain her confidence), Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles have charged her with illegal misuse of the protected computers of the California-based Myspace company.
Despite protestations of Lori Drew's (latest) attorney, Los Angeles-based federal prosecutors do have jurisdictional standing to bring charges, because the crimes charged are actually crimes against the Beverly Hills-based Myspace, and through it one of its clients.
Scott Glover, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer reports:
From ABC news:
Although Missouri authorities declined to file charges against Drew for her participation/ approbation of a scheme to fool a child into revealing confidences to a Trojan Boy (a false internet persona created exclusively to reel her in and gain her confidence), Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles have charged her with illegal misuse of the protected computers of the California-based Myspace company.
Despite protestations of Lori Drew's (latest) attorney, Los Angeles-based federal prosecutors do have jurisdictional standing to bring charges, because the crimes charged are actually crimes against the Beverly Hills-based Myspace, and through it one of its clients.
Scott Glover, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer reports:
A federal grand jury in Los Angeles today indicted a woman of fraudulently using a MySpace.com account to "cyber-bully" a Missouri teenager who later hanged herself because she believed she was being rejected by a 16-year-old boy she met on the social networking website.
Lori Drew, 49, of O'Fallon, Mo., faces three counts of accessing protected computers without authorization to obtain information to inflict emotional distress on the girl and one count of conspiracy. ..
Drew's attorney, H. Dean Steward, said he plans to wage a vigorous defense, suggesting that prosecutors in Los Angeles were overstepping their jurisdiction.
"There are a lot of issues we are going to need to raise, including why it's happening in Los Angeles," Steward said. "It seems like a Missouri case no matter how you cut it."
From ABC news:
"This adult woman allegedly used the Internet to target a young teenage girl, with horrendous ramifications," said U.S. Attorney Thomas P. O'Brien in a written statement.
"After a thorough investigation, we have charged Ms. Drew with criminally accessing MySpace and violating rules established to protect young, vulnerable people."
Labels: indictment, Lori Drew, Los Angeles, Megan Meier, Myspace
Comments:
<< Home
Hi Sarah,
I was wondering if you had heard the news. I am so glad that perhaps now Lori Drew will have to pay for what she has done. Karma has a way, does it not?
A fan,
Bethie
I was wondering if you had heard the news. I am so glad that perhaps now Lori Drew will have to pay for what she has done. Karma has a way, does it not?
A fan,
Bethie
If found guilty, I am sure Mrs. Drew will not see any jail time. The very least the Meier family may use a guilty verdict to file a civil suit.
It's a heat breaking story. If i had not read this story by own 13 yr old daughter may have had a myspace account.
It's a heat breaking story. If i had not read this story by own 13 yr old daughter may have had a myspace account.
- Wondering why no one is pursuing the latest child abuse Federal internet laws, or does that only apply to sexual abuse?
Did they charge Megan's parents, as well? Apparently, she was also in violation of the MySpace TOS by having an account at the age of 13.
Otherwise, the prosecutors seem to be in the rather precarious position of criminally prosecuting *some* TOS violations but not all.
I suspect that a simple demonstration of the fact that MySpace is *not* a protected system will get this case tossed.
Otherwise, the prosecutors seem to be in the rather precarious position of criminally prosecuting *some* TOS violations but not all.
I suspect that a simple demonstration of the fact that MySpace is *not* a protected system will get this case tossed.
The -
If you think it's all about TOS violation, look again at the indictment. There is a good bit more to it. Not only were TOS violated, but in a way that is in violation of Federal interstate commerce law.
They allege that it was done with a specific criminal intention ( to gain information* not available for public view that resides on protected Myspace computer) and in furtherance of a tortious act that is a violation of not only TOS, as most people keep reporting, but a Federal code.
Yes, the prosecutors are going after a SPECIAL kind of TOS violation, one that includes certain elements that are criminal.
Did Megan fake her age in her user info provided to Myspace, to get access to private information protected on Myspace servers, from any specific individual who uses myspace, for tortious purposes?
I don't see how you could make any convincing argument of that.
She wanted to socialize mainly with people who knew who she was, already, and being 13and 3 quarters vs 14 is not really a material misrepresentation of her identity to Myspace Community members, though it is a misreprestation to Myspace and a violation of TOS.
Drew is not simply charged with a TOS violation.
There are many essays and posts about the indictment, most indicating why it should fail.
Some seem to missing salient facts, even blogs that are quite interested in every technical aspect of the indictment as well as overarching social and legal implications.
I haven't given it any serious treatment here as I just don't have the stomach for dry discussions of the case.
The indictment may fail, but the violation of Megan and her parents is not the equivalent of the charges alleged against Drew.
If you think it's all about TOS violation, look again at the indictment. There is a good bit more to it. Not only were TOS violated, but in a way that is in violation of Federal interstate commerce law.
They allege that it was done with a specific criminal intention ( to gain information* not available for public view that resides on protected Myspace computer) and in furtherance of a tortious act that is a violation of not only TOS, as most people keep reporting, but a Federal code.
Yes, the prosecutors are going after a SPECIAL kind of TOS violation, one that includes certain elements that are criminal.
Did Megan fake her age in her user info provided to Myspace, to get access to private information protected on Myspace servers, from any specific individual who uses myspace, for tortious purposes?
I don't see how you could make any convincing argument of that.
She wanted to socialize mainly with people who knew who she was, already, and being 13and 3 quarters vs 14 is not really a material misrepresentation of her identity to Myspace Community members, though it is a misreprestation to Myspace and a violation of TOS.
Drew is not simply charged with a TOS violation.
There are many essays and posts about the indictment, most indicating why it should fail.
Some seem to missing salient facts, even blogs that are quite interested in every technical aspect of the indictment as well as overarching social and legal implications.
I haven't given it any serious treatment here as I just don't have the stomach for dry discussions of the case.
The indictment may fail, but the violation of Megan and her parents is not the equivalent of the charges alleged against Drew.
Ah, but the violation is equivalent.
The only thing protecting that information *was* the TOS. There were no other protections in place.
The biggest culprit in this particular scenario is MySpace. They are not exercising any due care whatsoever in their verification processes.
The only thing protecting that information *was* the TOS. There were no other protections in place.
The biggest culprit in this particular scenario is MySpace. They are not exercising any due care whatsoever in their verification processes.
No, they aren't equivalent, by any measure - not the "violation of TOS" , and also not the elements of the crime Drew in alleged to have perpetrated in the indictment.
Missing from Megans technical violation of the age requirement did not include a material misrepresentation to another user of Myspace in order to get information to intentionally hurt them.
Whereas Drew is charged with gaining access not just to myspace with a fake identity, but to Megan's private pages specifically, in order to hurt her.
Myspace does protect that information from public view, even from members of Myspace ( It is blocked unless the user grants permission for its view.)
Missing from Megans technical violation of the age requirement did not include a material misrepresentation to another user of Myspace in order to get information to intentionally hurt them.
Whereas Drew is charged with gaining access not just to myspace with a fake identity, but to Megan's private pages specifically, in order to hurt her.
Myspace does protect that information from public view, even from members of Myspace ( It is blocked unless the user grants permission for its view.)
I just read about this case, and as someone who works in software security I think the prosecutors are stretching the hacking laws a bit far. Anyway, this Drew family is being taught a pretty tough lesson now. Their business will probably fail and whatever trial that comes will drain their finances. The woman should just make a deal and get it over with instead of saying she's innocent. Everybody knows she's guilty anyway so she probably doesn't have a chance at a jury trial. I hope she gets mature enough not to mess with little kids again.
Post a Comment
<< Home
