• REVERSE LOOKUP PHONE NUMBER Includes up-to-the minute listing updates for owner's name/ address, unlisted numbers, cell phone & internet (VoIP) numbers, and much more! Enter phone number (ex: 555-555-5555) GUARANTEE: NO RESULTS – NO CHARGE!

  Special Offers

  * GPS Systems
  
  * Nokia Accessories
  
  * Motorola Stuff
  
  -- All with Guaranteed Lowest Prices!
• 
  Subscribe To My Podcast with iTunes
  
  
  See how we're connected!
  
  
  Stop by and Say Hello, and I'll add you as a Friend!
  
  
  Say Hello, and I'll add you as a Friend here too!
  
  
  
  
  
  

Although there is no universally accepted definition of cyberstalking, the term is used to refer to the use of the Internet, e-mail, or other electronic communications devices to stalk another person.

Stalking generally involves harassing or threatening behavior that an individual engages in repeatedly, e.g., following a person, appearing at a person’s home or place of work, making harassing phone calls, leaving harassing messages or objects, or vandalizing a person’s property.
Read more

Tags: facebook, cell phone, sprint, public records, alltel

If you're new to our site, you might consider subscribing to our Full RSS feed. Subscribe now, and you'll get an offer that's only available to folks who read our feed!

This article is the last of a three-part discussion on the nature of, and relationship between, cyber-bullies, griefers and the legal concept of harassment.

Because the terms “cyber-bully” and “griefer” are often tossed around interchangeably, I began the first part of our discussion by clarifying the term “griefer,” the second part by clarifying “cyber-bully,” and by explaining (in both cases) when and under which circumstances the two terms were meaningfully distinguished.

I will begin this section by introducing the legal term harassment.

Where Cyber-Bullying Becomes Harassment
We can certainly split hairs over whether we’re looking at a simple case of “griefing” or “cyber-bullying” or whatever else one might prefer to call it. But, whenever we’re looking at conduct that substantially interferes with the education or physical or mental health of a student, or that threatens or intimidates a student — we are at the same time, looking at what the courts have overwhelmingly held as “plain, old-fashioned harassment.”

Once the perpetrator has engaged in harassment, the law could care less whether they were doing so while playing an online game (as a “griefer”), or were just being malicious to a fellow student (as a “cyber-bully”).

Either case, where it constitutes a pattern of inappropriate, disrespectful behaviors, becomes unlawful when (a) enduring the offensive conduct becomes a condition of continued education (for the victim), or (b) when the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to create an educational environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive.

“Online harassment,” aside from occurring in an online environment, can still be construed as simple harassment. It can be direct or indirect, where direct online harassment would include threats, intimidating messages and/ or bullying that is sent directly to a victim by email or other forms of online communication, or by hindering the victim’s internet service, by hacking.

Chat rooms, instant messaging services, and social networking sites are all among the most popular venues for cyberbullying, and account for almost all instances of online harassment. Online harassment can even follow the victim home.

Two of the more important things we learn by looking at cyber-bullying from a legal perspective, is that (a) where harassment is found, the responsibility for creating a safe and respectful school environment is placed on the manager; and (b) schools have a legal responsibility to intervene when they know or suspect students are being harassed. One way to intervene is to punish. But, before punishing students, schools must draw a distinction between harassment and student expression (i.e., free speech) that is protected by law.

“. . . schools do not need to wait to respond to conduct until it escalates to a point where it may be punished. Schools may respond to such conduct in ways other than punishment. In fact, they have a responsibility to do so. For example, if a teacher were to overhear a student directing a homophobic slur at another student, she would have a responsibility to explain why such language is inappropriate and harmful. The teacher should also point out that if such conduct continues, it could be subject to punishment. There is no better way to prevent student harassment than to educate students about why slurs and other harassing behavior are harmful.”

- ACLU

By narrowly tailoring its punishments to fit the case at hand, a school strikes the proper balance between two equally important and entirely compatible constitutional rights — the right to equal protection of the laws and the right to free speech.

Insofar as my professional training does not lie directly in the area of law, I think it best at this point to simply direct your attention to the ACLU, which provides a model anti-harassment policy that can prevent harassment without violating student’s free speech rights.

Tags: sprint, gps, iphone, social networking, cell phone number lookup

This article is the second of a three-part discussion on the nature of, and relationship between, cyber-bullies, griefers and the legal concept of harassment.

Because the terms “cyber-bully” and “griefer” are often tossed around interchangeably, I began the first part of our discussion by clarifying the term “griefer,” and explaining when and under which circumstances the two terms are meaningfully distinguished.

That in mind, I will begin this section with a clarification of the term “cyber-bully.”

The Cyber-bully
Cyber-bullies operate outside the context of games, be they online or off.

Cyberbullying can include cruel jokes, malicious gossip, embarrassing information or photographs, and/ or Web sites designed to target a specific child or teacher. It can involve someone your child knows, maybe or a complete stranger. Cyber bullying is often limited to online insults about someone’s physical appearance, friends, clothing, or sexuality. But, some cyber bullies are more creative; they can be completely horrid, emotionally damaging but mostly, just plain cowardly.

Cyber bullying is the new way that bullies target their victims. It can involve tricking someone into divulging personal or potentially humiliating information and then sending it to other people online. Perpetrators use instant-messaging (IM), chat rooms, and websites to threaten, humiliate, and belittle their victims. Cyberbullying is primarily relational bullying — it takes place online, which for today’s teens, is the most social of social spaces. Instead of rumor being whispered in the hallway at school, it now is copied, pasted and forwarded.

Out of respect for all involved, the following extended quote was copied in whole from the commentary of a recent YouTube video entitled, “Megan Meier’s Death Linked to Friend’s CYBER-BULLY Parents!”

Should the adults involved in deceiving Megan, Lori and Curt Drew, be held accountable for their actions? The Drews have been besieged with negative publicity, and Meier’s death prompted her hometown of Dardenne Prairie to adopt a law engaging in Internet harassment a misdemeanor. In a bizzare twist the law’s first use could be to prevent possible harassment against the Drews!

Megan Meier died believing that somewhere in this world lived a boy named Josh Evans who hated her. The final message Megan Meier saw on her MySpace account: “Everybody in O’Fallon knows how you are. You are a bad person and everybody hates you. Have a shitty rest of your life. The world would be a better place without you.”

On Oct. 16, 2006, Ron and Tina Meier discovered Megan had tied a cloth belt around a support beam in her closet and hanged herself. Megan died the following day.

Six weeks after Megan’s death her parents were informed that Megan was the victim of a cruel hoax on MySpace. The perpetrators were the parents of Megan’s one time friend. The Drews had concocted Josh Evans to get back at Megan for quarreling with their daughter. After Megan’s death, they even asked Megan’s parents if they could store their foosball table in Megan’s parent’s garage. Upon learning the details of what had happened to their daughter and who was behind it, Megan’s father destroyed the, “alleged” hoaxers Curt and Lori Drew’s, foosball table.

Because Ms. Drew had taken Megan on family vacations, she knew the girl had been prescribed antidepression medication, Ms. Meier said. She also knew that Megan had a MySpace page.

Ms. Drew had told a girl across the street about the hoax, said the girl’s mother, who requested anonymity to protect her daughter, a minor.

“Lori laughed about it,” the mother said, adding that Ms. Drew and Ms. Drew’s daughter “said they were going to mess with Megan.” Over the last year the Drew’s have had threatening phone calls, a brick through the window,a lawn job and paintball attacks.

This Wednesday [late November, 2007], officials in Megan Meier’s home town vote on whether to make online harassment a local crime. The proposed ordinance would make online harassment a Class B misdemeanor, punishable by a $500 fine and up to 90 days in jail.

Or, the telecommunications harassment law. Amended in 2005, the law prohibits people from anonymously using the Internet with the intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person.

aliceangel17

You can read more about this case on this website; relatedly, you can join a Google group devoted to exposing online predators and cyber-paths here.

In the meantime, it’s important to consider that those who engage in cyber-bullying are probably not thinking about the consequences of their actions, and probably believe they are smart enough to not get caught because of their presumed “invisibility.” From what we’ve read of Lori Drew (above), this was probably not so in her case (far from it) — but, either way you look at it, cyber-bullying is still a repeated attack (i.e., a harassment) on others, and chances are, if someone is being cyber bullied, they are probably also being physically bullied at school; as, again, we found with Megan Meier.

Long story short: CYBER-PATHS NEED TO BE VERY SURE WHAT THEY ARE ACCUSING SOMEONE OF! THE TRUTH is a 100% defense to defamation or libel. Accusing someone of defamation or libel when they are telling the truth, however, IS actionable.

While we are reticent to call “cyber-bullying” a crime or in any other way, to treat children as adults — we cannot hold them as innocent or otherwise ignore the damage they inflict on innocent others, damages which in some cases have resulted in suicide.

For this reason, we look to the law to understand how it views such behaviors, where it draws important distinctions, what it requires in terms of responsibilities, and what it provides by way of civil remedies. The final section of our discussion will take up the question of where cyber-bullying becomes harassment.

Tags: pocket pc, obama, people finder, nokia, online security

This article is the first of a three-part discussion on the nature of, and relationship between, cyber-bullies, griefers and the legal concept of harassment.

Because the terms “cyber-bully” and “griefer” are often tossed around interchangeably, I’d like to clarify when and under which circumstances they are meaningfully distinguished (at least for our purposes), and when they are not. General definitions, set in their proper context, will probably suffice for this purpose. Where such definitions fail to adequately reach, or address, problems involving physical or psychological damages, we will look to the law to determine (a) whether it has come to recognize meaningful distinctions between griefers and cyber-bullies. More importantly, we will look to the law to (b) get a better understanding of the types of remedies it provides where damages are incurred (Note: though it would seem to “round-out” our discussion to lie it alongside an actual case study, our blog format is not suitable for such elaborations, so anyway . . . ).

Let me begin with a general clarification of the term “griefer.”
Read more

Tags: public records, nokia, online security, obama, ipod

The rise in social networking and web+2.0" rel="tag">web 2.0 has created a fervent buzz among internet users and has kept them scrambling to keep up with newer, more exciting features. Among the areas to be covered in this article are Facebook, blogging sites, YouTube, privacy, assumptions, perspectives, and using social networking’s power for good.

Read more

Tags: smartphone, sprint, facebook, obama, nokia

Next Page →