Lori Drew indicted

[oggbashan]

I had originally written a longer post, but I decided to summarise the salient point.

Al Capone was arrested and charged with tax evasion in 1931. There is absolutely nothing new about charging someone with something because the law is not amenable to charging them for what they really did that was wrong. This case, regardless of its merits or lack thereof, is by no stretch of the imagination an example of the decline in the standard of the application of US law.


And it still has nothing to do with the Sixth Amendment.

But Al Capone HAD evaded his taxes - on a massive scale.

Has Lori Drew, as an on-line hoax, done something that many others don't do every day on the internet including all those Nigerian scams? The crime she is alleged to have committed was heinous but was her use of the internet illegal? Would kidnappers be charged with misuse of the US Mails if they posted a ransom demand?

Og

 

[Equinoxe]

But Al Capone HAD evaded his taxes - on a massive scale.

Has Lori Drew, as an on-line hoax, done something that many others don't do every day on the internet including all those Nigerian scams? The crime she is alleged to have committed was heinous but was her use of the internet illegal? Would kidnappers be charged with misuse of the US Mails if they posted a ransom demand?

Og

That is true. Nevertheless, the State wanted him for the real crimes he committed, but couldn't prove that he was involved and so threw the book at him on a lesser charge. The reality is that that is as old as the need for evidence in a criminal proceeding. For as long as prosecutors have had to prove that people were guilty, people suspected of terrible things have been charged with lesser things that are easier to prove and for as long as people have managed to get away with crimes on technicalities, they've been aggressively pursued on minor charges. Furthermore, for as long as people have been charged with crimes, they've been subject to phony charges out of revenge and moral outrage. It isn't a new phenomenon and in spite of the ideals of modern society, it has never been eliminated.

However, that is a very valid point. It is questionable that what she did for which she has been charged actually meets the criteria for the crimes she is alleged to have committed: undoubtedly, she is being pursued for crimes against MySpace because of her [apparently non-criminal] involvement in Megan's death. A jury will ultimately decide whether what she did, for which she is charged, was illegal.

I am most certainly not saying that this is somehow good or just, only that it is hardly unprecedented or indicative of a sudden recent collapse of the American legal system; some of the rhetoric in this thread has become a tad hyperbolic.

P.S. Tad Hyperbolic sounds like the name of a character in cheesy sci-fi.

 

[Stella_Omega]

The penalties that Lori Drew is being threatened with are not commensurate with the penalties that have been handed out in any previous case.

Al Capone's jail sentence wasn't and isn't that unusual for income tax evasion. He didn't set any precedents-- as far as income tax evasion goes. Lori Drew would set a very draconian precedent for internet identity issues and no precedent at all for cyberstalking or bullying.

P.S. Tad Hyperbolic sounds like the name of a character in cheesy sci-fi.

I'm keeping a list-- may i add it, or do you want it all to yourself?