Legal News

MySpace Defendant?s Lawyer: ?Vagueness? Should Free My Client

By Dan Slater

The last time we checked in on the so-called MySpace suicide case, defendant Lori Drew had pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy and accessing protected computers without authorization, with each of the four counts carrying a maximum sentence of five years. Drew’s case was assigned to District Court Judge George Wu.

In the interim, Judge Wu, confirmed to the bench last year, held a status conference at which the lawyers agreed to a five-day trial to begin on October 7. Defense motions are due July 23 and the hearing on those motions will take place September 4.

Today, we caught up with Lori Drew’s lawyer, Dean Steward, who was up in Sacramento working on another matter. Steward got involved in Drew’s case after being approached by Jim Briscoe, the attorney that repped Drew in Missouri, where the tragic events took place.

Quick refresher: According to this New Yorker article and last month’s indictment, Drew — under the guise of “Josh” — struck up a flirtatious online relationship with Megan Meier, a 13-year old MySpace member, that lasted for several weeks. “Josh” — who was the MySpace handle of at least three other individuals in addition to Drew — allegedly told Megan she was “sexi” and made other sexually suggestive overtures. Then, after an online spat instigated by “Josh,” he told Megan that the world would be a better place without her. Distraught, Megan argued with her mother, and then went to her bedroom, where she hanged herself in her closet.

According to Steward, the facts are very much in dispute as to what Drew did or didn’t do. For example, he mentioned that another teenager who helped Drew set up the MySpace account and sent comments to Megan has since confessed to her role on the Today Show.

As for the law, Steward says he intends to challenge the indictment on two grounds: failure to state an offense, and vagueness. “If you look at the allegations in indictment,” said Steward, “they don’t address all the elements of the statute.” But he said the most important defense is a constitutional challenge for “vagueness” — i.e. an argument that the statute doesn’t give the defendant adequate notice to prepare to defend against the indictment.

“It has to do with the definitions of ‘access’ or ‘protected computer’ or ‘unauthorized,’” said Steward. “They’re not defined in the statute, and no other federal statue defines them. What’s unauthorized access? Does that mean if I violate any term of service, then I’m not authorized? We argue that it doesn’t mean that, and that the government would have to prove that my client and her co-conspirators would have to known the terms of service.” (NB: So far, there are no co-conspirators — indicted or otherwise — in the case.)

Back in Missouri: Last week, Governor Matt Blunt signed a bill into law that’s designed to better enable prosecution of Internet harassment. Blunt, according to this report in the St. Charles Journal, said the law will make harassment and stalking a class D felony, meaning that adults who harass children Online could face up to four years in prison. Tina Meier, Meghan’s mom, said, “I think definitely Megan would be proud to know we’re fighting for other people in her name.”

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on July 10, 2008 (boomark / email).