The St. Louis Blog



Add to Technorati Favorites

Blogroll

Local Media

Music

St. Louis Sites

Unreal's Local Blogs o' the Week

St. Louis Proposes Law Against “Cyber-Harassment”

Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 03:10:55 PM

In response to the escalating rage over the death of St. Charles teen Megan Meier, the St. Louis Board of Aldermen today introduced legislation that would make “cyber-harassment” a crime.

If approved, the Board Bill 404, sponsored by Board of Aldermen president Lewis Reed and Alderwoman April Ford-Griffin, would prohibit “harassment by means or use of the Internet or other electronic communications.” The offense would carry a fine of up to $500 and 90 days in jail.

St. Louis is not the first Missouri city to respond to the controversy with legislation in recent weeks. Florissant and Dardenne Prairie (where Meier lived), passed similar ordinances last week, and the neighboring city of St. Charles is reportedly considering a law that would carry a $1,000 fine and up to a year in jail.

“It is my hope that we can avoid future situations like those that have affected surrounding communities,” Ford-Griffin said.

The text of the bill is not yet available on the city’s online database but a press release covering the topic included an overview that describes the Alderman’s broadly encompassing definition of “cyber-harassment.”

The document states: “Cyber-harassment consists of…an individual [that] intends to harass, alarm, annoy, abuse, threaten, intimidate, torment or embarrass any other person by means of the transmission of electronic communication.”

Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU of Eastern Missouri, says his organization is concerned that rash legislation will have unintended consequences.

“Our concern is that people are being too hasty in responding to a specific situation, and not being careful in narrowly drawing a statute,” he says. “The danger is, if the law is struck down as being overly broad it is completely struck down so it wouldn’t even protect the people they’re trying to protect. Really they should be careful and diligent rather try and ramrod something through.”

According to Rory Roundtree, an assistant to Reed, says the proposed legislation still has to clear the committee process and the earliest it could become an ordinance is the end of January.

-Keegan Hamilton

3 Comments:

Al says:

The federal “Violence Against Women Act" has several recent revisions concerning cyber-stalking by an anonymous individual using the internet and it could and SHOULD be used to prosecute Lori Drew's stalking of Megan Meier.

On Wednesday, October 21st, city officials wasted no time enacting an ordinance designed to address the public outcry for justice in the Megan Meier tragedy. The six member Board of Aldermen made Internet harassment a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a $500 fine and 90 days in jail.

Does this new law provide any justice for Megan? Does this law provide equitable relief for a future victim?

The Vice rejects the premise of this new law and believes it completely misses the mark. Classifying this case as a harassment issue completely fails to address the most serious aspects of the methods Lori Drew employed to lead this youth to her demise. The Vice disagrees that harassment was even a factor in this case until just a couple of days before Megan's death.

Considering this case a harassment issue is incorrect because during the 5 weeks Lori Drew baited and groomed her victim, the attention was NOT unwanted attention. Megan participated in the conversations willingly because she was misled, lured, manipulated and exploited without her knowledge.

This law willfully sets a precedent that future child exploiters and predators might use to reclassify their cases as harassment cases. In effect, the law enacted to give Megan justice, may make her even more vulnerable. So long as the child victim doesn't tell the predator to stop, even a harassment charge may not stick with the right circumstances and a good defender.

Every aspect of this case follows the same procedural requirement used to convict a Child Predator. A child was manipulated by an adult. A child was engaged in sexually explicit conversation (as acknowledged by Lori Drew herself). An adult imposed her will on a child by misleading her, using a profile designed to sexually or intimately attract the 13 year old Megan.

Lori then utilized the power she had gained over this child to cause significant distress and endangerment to that child. She even stipulated to many of these activities in the police report she filed shortly after Megan's death.

City officials who continue to ignore this viable, documented admission and continue to address this issue as harassment are intentionally burying their heads in the sand, when the solution is staring them right in the face. Why?

There are several other child exploitation laws on the books. To date, none of them have even been considered by City, State and Federal officials in this case. The Vice is outraged that a motion was never even filed, so that the case could at least be argued before a judge or jury.

Danny Vice
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com

MattHurst says:

Does this count?

Post a comment

Comments may not show up immediately after submission. Please wait a minute after posting a comment for it to appear.




Riverfront Times Insiders

  • Local food, music and news blasts
  • Free Stuff