Justice Dept. Blunders With Drew Prosecution

By TChris, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:49:00 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This:

More rational minds than those prevailing at the U.S. Attorney's office in Los Angeles are speaking out against the ill-conceived prosecution of Lori Drew:

If the charges against Drew are upheld, it will be a serious blow to anyone who wants to remain anonymous on the Internet, said Brock Meeks, a CDT spokesman. "Everybody that is sympathetic to this case and saying finally we've got something to nail her on here, they're not looking hard enough at the fact that the Justice Department blundered by using this anti-hacker law," he said.
The charges suggest that anyone who uses a fake name to sign up for a Web service like Yahoo or Gmail could be charged with a federal crime, Meeks said. "If that's a federal crime, then I'm certainly guilty of a federal crime and there are probably a million other people out there who are probably also guilty."

The CDT, an advocacy group that promotes open Internet use, will hold a press conference on the issue Tuesday morning, Meeks said.

The law was intended to provide a vehicle for prosecution of cases like this, not for the federal prosecution of harassment of one neighbor by another.

< Obama Will Not Count FL And MI | Ohio GE Poll: Clinton Wins, Obama Does Not >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Justice Dept. Blunders With Drew Prosecution | 21 comments (21 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Maybe... (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by cmugirl on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:31:48 PM EST

But this woman needs to be punished. Do you have any ideas how that can happen?

I'm no lawyer.... (5.00 / 2) (#4)
by kdog on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:43:14 PM EST

but how about harassment?

If this is what it takes to get punishment, better to let this woman go unpunished than to potentially punish a million people with her and further erode our liberty.

Freedom isn't free as the saying goes, it means some unpleasantness sometimes. Give the government the power to prosecute people who use an alias on the internet and they will abuse it eventually.

[ Parent ]

What was Kevorkian (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by JavaCityPal on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:05:52 PM EST

convicted of?

Lori Drew was very aware of Megan's fragile nature and that she needed medication to keep it under control.

To think of the despair this young girl must have been feeling is heartbreaking.

Can she be sued for "wrongful death" in the civil courts?

[ Parent ]

: Kevorkian (none / 0) (#12)
by cmugirl on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:10:56 PM EST

was convicted of second degree murder and delivery of a controlled substance

[ Parent ]

Posthumously. (none / 0) (#3)
by sweetthings on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:35:38 PM EST

For the believers among us, anyway.

On a more serious note, she is being punished, even though she's not currently in jail. She's turned herself into a social pariah. And thanks to Google, there's very little chance she's ever going to live this down. What Lori Drew did may not have been illegal, but it was most certainly wrong. Her community realizes that and has shunned her appropriately.

[ Parent ]

Sorry (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by cmugirl on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:49:18 PM EST

OJ is supposedly a social pariah too.

This is where the vengeful part of me takes over. This woman had no right to do what she did and a little girl is dead for it. She needs to pay somehow- not that it will bring the little girl back.

Besides, she can always move and in 1 month, no one will know her name, so I don't buy that she will be ostracized long.

[ Parent ]

There's always street justice.... (none / 0) (#7)
by kdog on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:54:43 PM EST

If somebody irreperably harms somebody I love, I'm getting vengeful too. If someone wants justice bad enough, they can go get it themselves, though there is a potential price to be paid.

I take heart in street justice, if not that there is always karma. Ya gotta believe in karma to stay sane in this world.

[ Parent ]

: Karma (none / 0) (#11)
by cmugirl on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:09:46 PM EST

Just like "Earl"!

[ Parent ]

As a mother I would agree (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by JustJennifer on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:02:05 PM EST

She deserves to be punished but I am not sure what that means from a criminal perspective. I definitely think that the victim's family should sue her if they haven't already.

Drew Committed a Crime (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by Niffari on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:04:42 PM EST

I realize that the law may not have been intended to go after the Drews of this world. The fact that it can reach her where other laws fail may be stretching, but in a good direction. Ordinary people who post using false information are not at risk...unless they end up perpetrating a crime. Isn't that the key distinction here? Drew is a criminal. She caused harm by her actions. Terrible harm.

: that's the Bush's administrations (none / 0) (#19)
by Florida Resident on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:29:59 PM EST

logic behind taking away all our civil liberties. If your not a criminal you need not worry, sorry but who is to decide who is a criminal, You????? The Police????? Your Neighbor????? Me??????? Hmmm that kind of logic has long been a slippery slope.

[ Parent ]

Except in this particular case ... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by Donald from Hawaii on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:11:33 PM EST

... the so-called "harrassment" ended in thev death by suicide of an emotionally distraught 13-year-old girl deliberately targeted for abuse by the emotionally-stunted Ms. Drew, who was an adult masquerading as a 13-year-old boy.

I will agree with your assessment that this case is certainly a legal contortion of what federal officials claim is applicable statute, and as such probably not in compliance with the laws initial legislative intent. However, please don't trivialize the deliberate and predatory nature of the act committed by Ms. Drew.

Frankly, if law enforcement can legally target sexual predators who troll online for underaged victims, why can't we use the same such laws to curb the emotionally violent behavior of sick adults like Elizabeth Drew?

Jeralyn, because you're a defense attorney, I'd really be interested in your take on this issue. How do we protect children from adult predators, while at the same time preserving civil rights of the community at large? I refuse to accept the prevailing "either / or" argument, i.e. we can have one or the other, but not both.

: Excuse me - it's "Lori" Drew. (none / 0) (#16)
by Donald from Hawaii on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:15:21 PM EST

My bad.

[ Parent ]

how else (none / 0) (#1)
by Kathy on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:30:55 PM EST

am I going to be tall, young and thin? This is egregious.

Yes, she should be punished and (none / 0) (#6)
by Rhouse on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:54:29 PM EST

it should be done in such a way that doen't open up such a legal can of worms as to put others on the internet at risk. It could be argued that signing up here and not using your real name and using a "disposable address" would violate the law, not a road I want to go down. I can just see the GWB JOD deciding that posting under an "alais" is against this law and offering free trips to Gitmo.

Surprised (none / 0) (#14)
by chrisvee on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:13:04 PM EST

I was surprised that they finally found something with which to charge her. This has played out for a long period of time. I have to say I don't like the direction this thing is taking, although I do agree that Drew's actions were horrendous and there needs to be some remedy for the family's suffering.

Why don't cyberstalking laws cover this? Be gentle with me as I reveal my ignorance.

Alias use (none / 0) (#15)
by formerhoosier on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:13:44 PM EST

They are seriously underestimating how many use alias or fake information when they sign up for public e-mail accounts. Read several years ago the estimate was in excess of 90%. Reason - people do not trust their information will be kept private. Between data sharing, spam merchants, and identity theft most individuals provide as little information as possible to activate e-mail accounts. Yahoo, Gmail and any other public e-mail and many subscription blogs likely have information that is incomplete or aliased. Since operating systems have been continaully compromised, who can blame them for not wanting to divulge personal information. If the criteria is made that any information that is not completely factual, is a crime they might as well close down the internet. No one will want to use it except the government and education instituations. Companies will rely on their own intranets and opt out of the internet.

how do they police it? (none / 0) (#17)
by Kathy on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:20:45 PM EST

"Your name isn't FormerHoosier! J'accuse!"

[ Parent ]

: Good one Kathy :) (none / 0) (#18)
by formerhoosier on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:29:53 PM EST

ROFL!!!

[ Parent ]

A rose by any other name (none / 0) (#20)
by wurman on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:41:13 PM EST

I am aware that if I lie to my insurance carriers about any petty details in the applications that it is insurance fraud & they only have to return my premiums in the event of a loss & claim by me.

Correct?

The insurer doesn't have to prove illegal intent on my part, simply a false statement. This is true for auto, liability, homeowners, A&H, and medical--as near as I can tell from the policies & my agents.

It may seem over-the-top for the Feds to bungle this indictment in such a fashion. But I read somwhere that any user would do well to read the "terms & conditions" & the EULA agreements of all the things done via the internet.

It ain't what so many folks blithely assume.

And, by the way, try running that name-change thingee, after a divorce, with all the creditors & service providers & insurers. My ex- still gets two utility bills in my name.

And when you fill out an application for a security clearance, it would be wise to include "A#1 StudMuffin 48" in the line for "also known as" if you've been dancing in & out of the dating websites with some funny nickname.

This may look weird, however it seems in line with other stuff I specifically know about.

Computers, Freedom, and Privacy Conference (none / 0) (#21)
by Ben Masel on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:55:06 AM EST

Starts today, through Friday. New Haven CT, Omni Hotel. http://cfp2008.org

I'll be putting up at least a couple diaries.

Keep your eyes on November, Frodo. Don't use The Ring.