Slashdot Mirror


Texas Teen Arrested Under New Online Harassment Law

SpaceGhost sends in a story from San Antonio, TX: "Police have arrested a 16-year-old girl on charges of harassment under a new Texas law that took effect September 1, 2009. H.B. 2003 says a person commits a third degree felony if the person posts one or more messages on a social networking site with the intent to harm, defraud, intimidate or threaten another person. Police say the harassment went on for a few months and involved a dispute over a boy. ... Some people expect legal challenges to the constitutionality of the new Internet law.' The law is evidently a response to the Lori Drew case.

17 of 494 comments (clear)

  1. Your Honor! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

    "I respectfully submit that the defendant is a Meanie-Head in the first degree!"

    "My client wishes the court to know that the witness, in fact, 'started it'."

    1. Re:Your Honor! by Moryath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Was that a transcript from the case or a transcript from the latest session of Congress?

      Seriously though... any time speech is regulated, there's a problem. Yes, the Supreme Court has ruled that the right to Free Speech is not absolute, but the prosecution of a girl for calling another girl names over a dispute over a boy? A matter for parents and possibly high school guidance counselors, or on the rare outside case for a psychiatrist, but not for the courts.

    2. Re:Your Honor! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Enough! By the power vested in me by the State of My Mom's Dining Table, I sentence you to both... Kiss each other for 5 seconds!"

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:Your Honor! by Em+Emalb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I miss the days when disputes were settled on the playground after school. *sigh*

      Seemed a much simpler time, didn't it?

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    4. Re:Your Honor! by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A matter for parents and possibly high school guidance counselors, or on the rare outside case for a psychiatrist, but not for the courts.

      This is where you are wrong. An entire generation or more has been raised to believe in its own innate and unearned importance, and bolstered with a solid and unshakable faith in its responsibility-less intrinsic rights. They truly believe that they are entitled to do whatsoever they please, whenever they please to, and that they are educated and savvy enough to inject their opinions in any arena they see fit, and how dare anyone presume to tell them otherwise. Their rights are absolute at all times, without qualification of any kind.

      If you disagree with them, or are simply in their way, they're not going to engage in productive discussion or debate. That would imply that you are somehow their equal. Instead, they will call upon the full force of the great edifice of the Law, which exists solely to defend their inalienable right to _make_ the world bend to their will. As free, intelligent and independent citizens, they have every right to bring the full force of the State to bear in crushing you and your impudent challenges to their unique and inestimable way of life.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    5. Re:Your Honor! by madpansy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's already recourse for harassment or stalking. It's called a restraining order. I see no reason why we need special laws to guard against "special" cases like online social networks. I recall reading about a person being charged with violating a restraining order for "poking" someone on Facebook, so it appears at least one court understands how old laws continue to apply as society changes.

    6. Re:Your Honor! by jhfry · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure they could... they would issue a restraining order, which if violated could result in criminal charges.

      This law is unnecessary and open to abuse, the old system of filing a complaint, getting the courts to issue a restraining order, and daring your enemy to violate the order so that they can get busted is much more fun... and more fair too.

      Essentially the old system said "Stop it, I'm serious and I have the law on my side"... the new system will punish harassers without giving them a warning to stop first. There are many circumstances where a harasser might not realize that things have reached the point where the harassed is feeling harassed. Especially in the case of children, where the child may be OK, but the parents see some kid saying mean things about their "baby" and they want retribution... even when their "little angel" has already laughed it off.

      --
      Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
    7. Re:Your Honor! by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Reminds me of a bit from one of my favorite movies "You sharpen the human appetite to the point where it can split atoms with its desire; you build egos the size of cathedrals; fiber-optically connect the world to every eager impulse; grease even the dullest dreams with these dollar-green, gold-plated fantasies, until every human becomes an aspiring emperor, becomes his own God... and where can you go from there?"

      You mix the combination of giant egos with Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory and you end up with some seriously large douches. But the problem with laws like this is they ALWAYS get abused. Look at the 6 year old who was suspended and looking at being sent to a school for juvenile offenders for bring his cub scout multi-tool to school to eat lunch with. Laws like this will be badly abused, and the last thing we need is one of the last bastions of truly free speech turning into a place where you can't speak your mind for fear of getting arrested or sued. I for one would rather have free speech than some bureaucrat deciding whether or not something I said on a forum could take away my freedom, wouldn't you?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    8. Re:Your Honor! by Mendoksou · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...they are educated and savvy enough to inject their opinions in any arena they see fit, and how dare anyone presume to tell them otherwise.

      You mean like passing judgment on an entire generation? Don't for a second pretend that ego is a phenomena new to this generation. The simple fact is that every older generation in history has felt that the next generation was presumptuous and rude, and all too full of themselves. But what does that have to do with the law?

      Young people will be immature, and, since it is a forum on which they are a disproportional demographic, will be the majority of the forum trolls and flame-baiters and haters out there, and thus are most likely to get caught under this law (yes, I know the law doesn't cover trolling, but the trolls mentality is much closer producing threats than is the average mature person's). This does not change the fact that classifying threats online as illegal breaks with free speech precedent. Free speech does not include threats ONLY if it is backed by the threat of imminent violence, or if it is defamation (ok, most trolls fit here, but that's a civil matter, not a felony), or if it incites to riot. Threatening online matches none of these; no threat is imminent, as I'd have to get up, drive to your house, and THEN do whatever I said (in which case the prosecutable act is the physical one, the speech is peripheral and can only be evidence of forethought and intent, not a crime itself). So no, we are not claiming "responsibility-less intrinsic rights;" we are merely pointing out that the same rights that we enjoy elsewhere also should apply online.

      --
      DISCLAIMER: I am very rarely serious. If the above comment seems asinine makes no sense, it is most likely a bad joke.
    9. Re:Your Honor! by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Interesting
      And what about all those who don't want to fight, not because they are weak, but because they don't like fighting.

      The existence of people like that endangers the whole system whereby respect and status are established by means of violence. Consider: an alpha male in the schoolyard has established his position against all rivals by means of fights. He now becomes aware of a subculture that does not respect him for this - they may fear him, but they don't admire him. These people are called 'nerds' and they admire and respect intellectual accomplishment. Or a large collection of Warhammer 40K figures. Either way, they neither admire nor respect the willingness or ability to engage in physical fights. Indeed, they openly disdain it.

      This completely undermines his position! This alpha male demands the respect due to him for being so masculine and violent! And so he expresses himself in the only way he knows how: he beats up nerds until he has established to the satisfaction of his peers that he will not tolerate disrespect from inferiors of zero status, from people who have no interest in violence at all.

      Looking back on it from a distance of fifteen years or so it's a fascinating sociological study. Thank fuck I'm no longer living in it.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  2. List of Texas' Third Degree Felonies by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sorry to reply to myself but I found a list of felonies in the third degree for the state of Texas if you want to compare this new law to older laws resulting in the same degree of punishment. Apparently a third degree felony punishment (as noted in my parent post) can be meted out for anything ranging from arson to assault to conducting a game of bingo without a license.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  3. Re:About time by maudface · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having been a victim of such harassment in the past myself I agree wholeheartedly, I reported it to the police however they fairly resoundingly didn't appear to give a toss.

    Given how common it is for one's name to be googled by others these days online harassment can be every bit as damaging as real life harassment, it caused me quite serious upset for some months. This wasn't merely some childish dispute but an ex looking for revenge over every medium possible, creating profiles on facebook, bebo, myspace and various other websites with the specific intent of causing me as much damage as possible.

    While I'm in no means in favour of putting the internet under any form of state control this sort of activity warrants police attention and needs to be against the law. It strikes me as insane that so much focus is put on policing the internet to stop file sharers as opposed to protecting the individual.

  4. The law's not that bad, actually by MikeRT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's the text. Basically all it targets are people who harass others online assuming another person's identity. One girl creating a profile for another, where she claims to be a homosexual drug user who steals to support her habit would fall under this. Generic harassment doesn't. About the only thing that is far-reaching, and it's likely based on ignorance, is the "domain address" language which could be twisted by a prosecutor.

    Perhaps the law goes too far on the punishment side, but it doesn't prohibit any behavior which is protected by the first amendment. Only a moron would say "there are first amendment issues" since this law is little more than a double whammy on libel and slander.

  5. Re:About time by ChefInnocent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do you believe this girl deserves a minimum stint of 2 years in jail with a maximum of 10 plus a fine up to $10,000? We don't know the details, but regardless, the State of Texas will destroy her life for something she did when she was 16. Our country doesn't rehabilitate people, she won't end up with simple counseling, she will end up in prison for what amounts to stupid shit. The brain is not fully developed by 16, hormones are definitely unstable at 16, and yet she has been charged with a felony for saying something stupid.

    By the time her "victim" is in her mid-20's she will likely think nothing of it, but the "assailant" could still be in prison. And because of our wonderful penal system, she will likely be black marked for life and moving in and out of the criminal system. Why this couldn't be stopped at a much lower level, I don't know, but by using this method instead of others our "victim" and "assailant" will very much reverse roles.

    Hopefully, she can get a good judge who will she the long term effects of charging her as a felon and reverse course, but I don't have that sort of faith in humanity.

  6. Re:About time by cbreaker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The punishment doesn't even matter. If she has a felony conviction she's fucked.

    Almost every company out there now does background checks. While most of them claim "This won't necessarily disqualify you from this position" it most certainly will.

    It's a scarlet letter that keeps people that made some mistakes in their lives down. I have a few friends that are really decent people that made some stupid mistakes when they were 19/20/21 and such, and now 10 years later they still can't get work at a lot of places. Basically, they did what a lot of kids did, but they got caught..

    --
    - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  7. Re:Idiocracy by Thansal · · Score: 5, Funny

    Meh! Kirk has a goat in every port. Who does Picard have to come home to?

    An acting career?

    --
    Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
  8. Translation: by nimbius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "these dag-blasted kiddies think they know it all! and they think theyre soooo special! Sometimes they have the gall to do weird things i dont approve of and they dont want to listen to my complaining! these confounded kids call the sheriff when theres a disagreement instead of just fighting like i did back when i was a kid! I live in a peppridge farm commercial where nobody needs the police and you only call the sheriff when mountain justice wont work! "

    mod parent down...just becuse you use big words doesnt mean you suddenly become insightful.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.