We might be about to find out.
Last week, federal prosecutors filed charges against a Missouri woman who posed as a teenage boy on the Internet and harassed a 13-year-old girl who eventually committed suicide.
Lori Drew, 49, was charged under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, normally reserved for hackers who dig up information on protected computers. It is the first time prosecutors will pin the law on someone in regards to a social networking website.
According to prosecutors, Drew allegedly set up a false account on My-Space, called herself Josh Evans, built an Internet relationship with Megan Meier, then turned on her with cruel messages. The last message, in October 2006, allegedly told Megan that “the world would be a better place” without her. The teen later went and hanged herself in her bedroom closet.
The trial is scheduled to begin June 30.
There are a couple reasons to keep an eye on this case.
One is the pure audacity of the woman facing charges. My hope in humanity tells me she simply intended to be cruel and not cause a death. Still, anyone who can call themselves a parent and then purposely try to destroy the fragile self-esteem of an already temperamental adolescent is very sick and deranged. There’s no arguing that the case itself is really despicable.
But if we know anything in our society, it’s that throwing common sense out with the bath water in place of mutual outrage will come back to haunt us.
If prosecutors can successfully peg Drew as violating this law she is charged with breaking, it could open up a veritable Pandora’s Box of culpability for other Internet users. What if you have a penchant for sharing fat jokes on your blog and an overweight person becomes distraught after reading them and commits suicide?
It’s not the same? Why not? No false pretenses? What if you were pretending to be the fat guy from Subway?
What’s going to stop authorities from coming after you?
Who’s to say that’s not what authorities did, when after more than a year and a half of fruitless head scratching, they decided to charge Drew with this law reserved for cyber-dorks?
This is the predicament that is the Internet. Two decades after it was created, we still haven’t figured out how to patrol it or even agreed on whether we should patrol it.
Oh, sure, police are conducting sting operations left and right to catch up with sexual predators. But one can only be heartened by that if they don’t think of how many might be slipping through the cracks, possibly to our vulnerable children.
So, prosecutors finally found a way to make Drew stand accountable.
Or did they?
Some are already banging the drum that justice-hungry prosecutors bent the law to come up with a way for Drew to be brought up on charges. I happen to agree. Tacking some abstract law on Drew and saying,” I think this applies to you too” seems shaky at best. Maybe we can presume this is what happened in the Bible – that Cain killed his Abel and, unfamiliar with the concept of murder, he was charged with “unruly use of a farm implement.”
This case illustrates the need to decide on hard and fast rules on the Internet just as we have in our society or to get out and watch the people run amok.
Operating in this gray area will only cause more problems.
That’s why it’s crucial to watch how this case plays out.
Don ‘t worry about Lori Drew. There’s a fiery place waiting for someone with such blatant disregard for others.
Worry about us if the Internet becomes a “name your own law” game show.
