Posted on 05/24/2009 2:38:47 AM PDT by Scanian
Hard Cases, it is said, make bad law" -John Campbell Argyll
When a jury convicted 49 year old Lori Drew of O`Fallon Missouri (an ex-urb of St. Louis) in the now-infamous cyber-bullying case in which Drew posed as a teenage boy on Myspace to woo-then harass-13 year old Megan Meier, many were pleased that justice was done. But that pleasure quickly turned to disgust when it was learned that the jury`s verdict came with a standardized recommendation of probation and a large fine rather than jail time. The presiding judge in the case can still impose jail time at the sentencing hearing on May 18, and he is under considerable pressure to do so; the troubled young girl hanged herself as a result of Mrs. Drew`s harassment.
But Lori Drew was convicted by a jury in Los Angeles, not in Missouri, because there were no laws in the Show-Me State against what she did. Much like Al Capone, who was not convicted of racketeering or other criminal charges but of tax evasion, Drew could not be accused of any real crime, so Federal prosecutors charged her with fraud for creating a false profile on Myspace. Myspace is based in Beverly Hills.
And Mrs. Drew was acquitted of 3 felony counts because it could not be shown that she operated solely with malicious intent. She was convicted of 3 misdemeanor charges of unauthorized access to the networking site.
In short, there is no crime in cyberbullying.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
It is going to be a terrible day in the USA when people are punished for crimes for which they were they were not convicted.
It is a terrible day in the USA when people are not punished or convicted for crimes they have committed.
It is true... but we’re better off as a country for having such a high legal standard in place before someone can be prosecuted. Most of the time the criminals do get busted, but the fact that some criminals do get away wouldn’t make me want to change our system to one that is even more predisposed to prosecuting the innocent than what we have now.
So, would you still have the same opinion if you had a daughter that was raped and murdered and the criminal was released on a technicality?
My anger would be at the police and prosecutors who bungled the case. Technicalities exist to keep law enforcement honest.
Given the rise of SWAT teams breaking down the doors of innocents because of bad tips and other types of police brutality against innocents, there's times when I wonder who I should fear more, the crooks, who I can at least shoot back at, or the cops, who can break the rules and rarely if ever be held accountable for it.
At this point in my life, I realize some policemen should be locked up. I don’t fear them or criminals. I totally despise lawyers that use the “law” to get criminals released. I hope there is a special ward in hell for them.
This only works because the police and prosecutors are not doing their jobs. As an accused person is entitled to a vigorous legal defense, I see no problem with a lawyer using any legal trick in the book to achieve an acquittal.
How many times do we hear of cops busting a bad guy but it turns out the suspect was not read his rights? How many times do we hear that cops did not have a warrant to execute a planned search but do it anyway? This should be SOP by now and there is no excuse for law enforcement to not do these things.
If a prosecutor allows for a case to be dismantled because of a technicality, then that prosecutor is guilty of not doing his or her job.
I couldn’t be a lawyer. I wouldn’t lower myself enough to defend people I knew were guilty.
So the thugs walk. Nice system we have. :0(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.