Woman Goes on Trial for Cyber Stalking

A federal jury will deliberate today in the 2006 case of a Missouri woman accused of creating a fake profile on a social networking site in order to terrorize a teenage girl who later committed suicide.

A couple of years ago, Lori Drew, her daughter and her assistant posed as a teenage boy on MySpace with the intention of harassing and humiliating 13-year-old neighbor Megan Meier. Prosecutors claim their cruel messages ultimately led Meier to take her life.

AOL News points out some interesting facts in this article:
1)Prosecutors characterize the case as the nation's first cyber-bullying case, and the results from it could set legal precedents regarding online harassment
2)marks the first time the federal statute on accessing protected computers has been used in a social-networking case; It has been used in the past to address computer hacking

Drew's defense attorney Dean Steward told jurors on November 19 that Drew "did not violate the Computer Use and Fraud Act and reminded them she was not facing charges dealing with the suicide." Steward even attempted to get the U.S. District Judge to forbid mention of the suicide during the trial, since the case was about whether Drew violated the terms of service of MySpace-not whether she caused Meier's death. The request was denied...

Chapter 10 of Foust's "Online Journalism: Principles and Practices of News for the Web," addresses legal and ethical issues facing journalists in the online world. This cyber stalking case brings to mind Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which immunizes interactive computer service providers from liability for information originating from third parties (ex: Zeran v. America Online), yet some questions still spark concern. For instance, does this rule apply to and protect social networking sites like MySpace, Facebook and Twitter? I realize MySpace sets standards of conduct, but does it monitor or edit content published by users? Why is Drew the only responsible party in this case?

Another intersting tidbit mentioned in the article was that the case is being prosecuted in Los Angeles since MySpace's computer servers are based in the area. At first, I thought this was an example of forum shopping, yet upon further review of the facts, I'm not too sure why the case is being tried in L.A, and not Missouri were the crime was committed. It is my understanding that forum shopping gives plaintiffs the power to choose courts that are more likely to rule in their favor. But if the state is not bringing forth any charges against MySpace, why not just conduct the trial in Missouri? Just a thought...

Kudos to AOL News for posting this interesting story last week alongside an interactive survey and slideshow.