Elizabeth Thrasher Faces Four Years Over Craigslist Ad
August 19, 2009 by Morbid
ST PETERS, MISSOURI - Elizabeth Thrasher gets the embarrasing title of first person charged with felony harassment under Missouri’s “Megan’s Law” (not to be confused with the Megan Kanka law requiring law enforcement authorities to make information available to the public regarding registered sex offenders). The law was created after the suicide of 13-year-old Megan Meier, a girl who was being bullied over the Internet by other teens and an adult and then committed suicide. A lot of you around here know that I am not a big fan of this law or what happened with Lori Drew, the adult who took on the wrath of the online community for her role, and here is one example why.
Seems as if Thrasher was having some words with her ex-husband’s new girlfriend and her 17-year-old daughter. After some back-and-forth arguing on MyspaceMySpace
between Thrasher, the teen and the teen’s mother that ended with the teen telling Thrasher to “grow up“, Thrasher posted a picture of the 17-year-old girl in a provocative pose in the “Casual Encounters” of CraigslistCraigslist
. It included her photo, e-mail address and cellphone number. The teen began receiving lewd messages and photos from men and then notified police.
Because of this, Thrasher is the first person jailed and charged with felony harassment under Missouri’s Megan’s Law. Or to be more specific, cyber-harassment of a someone 17 or younger. Thrasher was freed on $10,000 bond, and has been barred from having a computer or Internet access at home. If she is convicted of this crime, which I am pretty sure she wont be, Thrasher could face up to four years in state prison, or up to a year in county jail, and a $5,000 fine.
While I do not agree with what Thrasher did, I am siding with her attorney, Michael Kielty, when he said the case was baseless.
“The facts are going to show there was not a crime here,” he said. “You look at the document. It doesn’t even show my client made contact with the alleged victim so I don’t know how they’re going to make the case...a very poorly crafted statute: it criminalizes behavior that but for the use of the internet and a computer wouldn’t be criminal, certainly not a felony,”
And I agree. Had this woman wrote down the girl’s name and number in a bathroom stall, something people do all the time, would we have even heard of this woman? Hell, I’m not even sure what she did fits the crime she was charged. The law she was charged under went into effect on AugustAugust reviews 28, 2008 and defines the crime of harassment to include knowingly intimidating or causing emotional distress anonymously or causing distress to a child via phone or electronically. It increases the penalty for harassment from a misdemeanor to a felony if it’s committed by an adult against someone 17 or younger, or if the criminal has previously been convicted of harassment. No doubt prosecutors can pigeon-hole Thrasher’s actions as breaking this cyber-law, but I think the judge in this case, like Lori Drew’s, will see things differently.
Now before I go on and some of you try to verbally lynch me by my short-hairs, let me stress that what Thrasher did was juvenile and in poor taste. I do not condone it. But that does not change the fact that Missouri’s “Megan’s Law” is poorly constructed and just an all-around bad idea born from good intentions. Look, no doubt women like Thrasher probably need to grow up and are worthy of a good smack upside the head. Even on this site we have witnessed members who go a little too far with actions they cloak with “doing the right thing“. But cast aside your disdain for a woman who lets herself become involved with this kind of bullshit, do you really think this woman deserves a felony harrassment charge for this? It just doesn’t sit right with me for some reason.
But no matter the outcome, there is any lesson to be learned from this. If any you juvenile women out there are going to get back at the teen who was mean to your kid at school, or is the daughter of the woman your ex traded you for, do NOT do it with the computer. Take out a Want Ad in the local paper or some shit. Sure there is a chance you may get charged with something…but at least it wont be a felony.
Ok, now lynch me- but please sound off and give me your views on this case, and the Megan’s Law in general. I am curious if I am in the minority or not.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Mo. Woman Charged With Cyberbullying on Craigslist (abcnews.go.com)
- Lori Drew case dismissed, and why it’s a good thing (inquisitr.com)
- Judge Overrules Jury, Acquits Lori Drew in MySpace Cyberbullying Case (wired.com)
9:37 am on August 19th, 2009
“Now before I go on and some of you try to verbally lynch me by my short-hairs, let me stress that what Thrasher did was juvenile and in poor taste.”
I don’t know enough about the relevant law to voice an opinion one way or the other. But posting a provocative picture of minor girl on the internet in a place on Craigslist called “casual encounters” with the girl’s cell phone number and other contact info is more than “juvenile” and “in poor taste.” It’s reckless at best, dangerous at worst, and I don’t think there’s a parent out there that wouldnt want to see this woman arrested.
Fuck Thrasher and fuck anyone else who puts a kid in harm’s way, sounds like whatever law was crafted is… working.
9:39 am on August 19th, 2009
No Morbid, you’re not wrong. Poorly crafted laws will, more often as not, cause more problems than if proper care had been taken. Laws that are overly broad are also a problem. Because, just like a shotgun, they can injure unintended innocent bystanders when used improperly.
Though I don’t like the law that’s being applied, I detest the immature actions of Ms. Thrasher. If it were my daughter, Elizabeth would be bankrupted by my civil litigations…
9:57 am on August 19th, 2009
it criminalizes behavior that but for the use of the internet and a computer wouldn’t be criminal, certainly not a felony
He’s wrong.
There are cases that date back before the computer age where people used other’s photos and personal information in order to exploit/shame those they held a grudge against.
Now though, you have a website involved along with a picture that probably shouldn’t exist in the first place.
Picture? Personal info? Girl under 18?
Personally I hope they toss the whole Megan Meier thing aside and take it to court.
TruTv has gotten boring
10:10 am on August 19th, 2009
Fuck Thrasher and fuck anyone else who puts a kid in harm’s way, sounds like whatever law was crafted is… working.
i don’t know about how the law was crafted, but Thrasher should be trashed. She committed a crime as far as I’m concerned.
10:12 am on August 19th, 2009
Here ya go
criminal impersonation is committed when an individual “[i]mpersonates another and does an act in such assumed character with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or defraud another“. In other words, it is illegal to impersonate a real person, but not a fictitious one. Thus, if Carol forges Ann’s name on checks made out to Ann so that Carol can cash the checks, Carol could be guilty of false impersonation — but only if Ann is a real person. Such laws are designed to protect innocent people from the losses they may incur owing to the wrongful acts of others and to restore any loss of dignity and reputation they may have suffered as a result of impersonation.
10:14 am on August 19th, 2009
^ That’s a pretty dated law, but it still stands in most states.
(You have to love the example though. Carol kites checks and shit)
10:20 am on August 19th, 2009
Aslan, so the law you just quoted could be used against someone who writes call Mary for a good time and puts Mary’s phone number along with it? Because that’s essentially what Thrasher did.
10:33 am on August 19th, 2009
Not sure how much clicks a bathroom stall gets on a daily basis. Fairly certain Craigslist may win out on amall margin.
I see where you’re coming from but I also see where she should be held accountable for
1)impact of reputation this girl may have received due to any number of her peers seeing it online
2) emotional (or actually..probably being pissed the hell off) distress every time her phone rang up until she changed her number
3) humiliation (honestly I’m not on the boat for this one, pose for pictures..don’t be all ZOMG when they end up online)
You’re correct though, it’s not that different from having your number and a note about your prowess on a stall. It’s just that her picture was involved. I really do think that will be the catalyst in the whole thing.
Plus, no matter how his attorney wants to spin it, her picture has a much better chance of ending up on your computer in your house than the dive’s bathroom stall.
10:42 am on August 19th, 2009
Some of my comments out of the forums. Short version: Stupid law.
Even as distasteful as someone using intimate knowledge or pictures of another person’s life against them is, it remains protected speech.
Lawmakers can’t legislate stupidity, ignorance, or even meanness out of society. They may drive it underground, but all will continue to exist.
In the case of this story, I would think a more supportable charge would have been those dealing with identity theft. The woman that posted the messages did assume another person’s identity, or attempt to, in order to solicit messages to this girl knowing that where she did it would bring some low caliber trash her way. Charges like that might at least stand a chance of surviving reviews by a higher courts when the time comes.
The local media calling this Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act (Introduced in House) Megan’s Law insults Megan Kanka and the good that particular law does. They should be both called to task for doing it, and ashamed that they did.
I sure hope my writing “for a good time e-mail Morbid” with his e-mail address in bathroom stalls does not get me tossed in jail. It’s a new world and putting his phone number seems so 1980s to me.
R
11:06 am on August 19th, 2009
I’m not a fan of Meiers law. Just to make that clear.
I am a fan of this woman being found guilty of impersonating someone with the intent to cause harm to her character. Not person. Character.
Pretty sure that’s how the trial will go, anyway.
I don’t see the Meier law standing up in court until someone can prove malicious intent against someone else involving the internet and suicide.
Could be just me though
*shrug*
later alligators
11:42 am on August 19th, 2009
[...] See the rest here: Elizabeth Thrasher Faces Four Years Over Craigslist Ad [...]
11:56 am on August 19th, 2009
Jeez, Morbid, who looks at the name and number on a bathroom stall and thinks “I’m sure she wrote this herself”? That’s a pretty weak standard of impersonation.
12:15 pm on August 19th, 2009
She is not being charged with impersonation. She is being charged with harassment resulting from posting another person’s name and number as if they were looking for sex. You know, sort of like writing it on a bathroom wall, or phone booth.
12:44 pm on August 19th, 2009
I think if someone is ignorant enough to post a minors info on craigslist like that, something should be done. I’m just curious, Morbid, what do you think should happen to Thrasher?
A girl on my sons facebook made fun of him and it did take a lot for me not to go after her, but I didn’t. How are kids supposed to learn how to handle situations if there mommies are running to their defense? (It also helped that she’s a little troll looking thing that has had a crush on him for a yr~so it wasn’t too awful~it was just meant to embarrass him) I told him either laugh it off or delete her as a friend. End of story.
12:48 pm on August 19th, 2009
It sounds to me like the prosecutor just wants to be the first to use this law. There’s a perfectly good law that applies to this situation (impersonation), but he wants to get all fancy with it. This really seems like a misdemeanor offense.
The teen & mom should take Thrasher on Judge Judy to sue her for harassment. I’m not ordinarily sue-happy, but I think it would do some good if people thought they could lose money by pulling stupid stunts like this.
Also, I’m totally onboard to lynch Morbid. Not ’cause I disagree with him, but work’s pretty boring today, and my pitchfork’s just gathering dust…
1:01 pm on August 19th, 2009
That’s a good question that I do not have an answer for at this time. I do know that 4 years in jail is not it. I think my biggest problem is that aside from the Megan’s Law, I am not sure she even committed a crime. I mean, if Thrasher were to have put out an ad in the local paper that stated the same shit, what would she have been charged with? Why does electronic equipment change something so drastically?
Obviously Thrasher is a moron for doing what she did, as well as not thinking that she lives in an area in which the Megan Meier’s Law applies, but still. What happened to the teen as a result? She got some messages from horny men? That is worth this woman going to jail for 4 years? I know knee-jerk reaction for some is “yes” but you really need to look at the bigger picture and how this law can not only be used, but abused.
Think about that the next time a teenager comes on this site as a friend of the accused (which we see a lot of) and you light into them with a nice verbal flame. Better hope they don’t blow their brains out over your well constructed post. You just may be held liable.
1:22 pm on August 19th, 2009
Criminal harassment is defined as “engag(ing) in intentional conduct which the actor [harasser] knows or has reason to know would cause the victim, under the circumstances, to feel frightened, threatened, oppressed, persecuted, or intimidated; and causes this reaction on the part of the victim. (M.S. § 609.749, Subd. I). Such conduct can include following or pursuing you, returning to your property without your consent, making repeated phone calls, inducing you to make calls, causing your phone to repeatedly ring, repeatedly mailing or delivering unwanted letters, objects, or gifts to you.
Found this on letswrap.com – sure sounds like this is harassment to me
1:30 pm on August 19th, 2009
Right, then charge with harassment (which would get thrown out). But even if it did I can not see how making someone’s cell phone repeatedly ring (and what defines repeatedly? two times? 15?) equals 4 years in jail.
1:40 pm on August 19th, 2009
Oh, and God forbid that this law starts gathering speed in the gaming community. What a riot that will be the first time I get to post a front page story over an Adult MMORPG player being charged under the Megan Meier Law for “harassing” a teen in World of Warcraft. lol! I’ll have a field day with that one.
1:44 pm on August 19th, 2009
While I agree nothing will probably come from this, I can’t help wishing it would. Do I think she deserves jail, absolutely not.
Maybe the embarrassment from having her pic posted with this write-up is enough.
1:46 pm on August 19th, 2009
Hell, credit card companies can make one’s phone repeatedly ring. I didn’t realize a ‘911′ call is all I need to stop them.
Shouldn’t be a felony. Hell, Facebook takes random photos posted by its members and puts them into on-line ads. And, can you imagine this creative solution on her parent’s part: Turn the cellphone off! Go to the mall and get a new number! Lay off the Facebook for a while as well.
Sounds like Thrasher is an idiot, but four years and ’strike 1′ it’s not.
1:55 pm on August 19th, 2009
I wholeheartedly disagree with the new law. This behavior should not be felony behavior and this woman should not get jail time. However…
In my opinion, either misdemeanor harassment or criminal impersonating would do the job. This woman put another individual’s picture and personal information in a public place, which resulted in unwanted contact. Yes, if I did the same thing on a bathroom wall, it resulted in unwanted contact and I was caught, I would be charged. Despite the lawyer’s optimistic prose, this kind of thing has been illegal for quite some time, now. The only difference these days is that it’s much easier to find the perp.
Fine her and slap her with some community service. The thought of this woman taking up a jail cell meant for the violent and depraved is absolutely asinine.
2:12 pm on August 19th, 2009
Yeah, that about sums up my thoughts.
2:27 pm on August 19th, 2009
Morbid, you said a mouthful. …I agree that 4 years is quite excessive. I think maybe it should be a misdemeanor for anything less than physical harm, and a felony for anything worse. And I reiterate MAYBE.
My thoughts are maybe it would be because with the technology there is a continuing abuse. IE; the banter back and forth can escalate and become unbearable for young teens, or immature adults. The provocative picture should never have existed, and why did Thrasher even have the pic?? Also, the posting of the picture, as we all know, can never be taken back. That pic is now out there forever for any would be freak to use however they want to. You can change your phone # and you email address, but not the pic. It also worries me that maybe some hacker could acquire the home address if they hack into someone’s email. (Please someone tell me if this is actually possible).
Sound like the law is trying to prevent suicide resulting from bullying. I don’t know the law, but I think, Morbid your right when you said:
If one of the men actually baited her into meeting with him, then I would hold Thrasher responsible for her part of the situation. Solicitation involving a minor, promoting child abuse, or whatever. It’s a whole new world out there in cyberspace. And with that comes a whole new set of crimes that our current laws are set up for.
I see one difference between what happened to the girl and what might happen here. Someone coming to DD and talking back and forth is volunteering there thoughts and opinions. We aren’t calling her cell and emailing her unsolicited like in the Thrasher case.
2:43 pm on August 19th, 2009
everyone knows bathroom walls are a joke
real hookers put adds in craigslist
there is a huge deference between the 2
2:43 pm on August 19th, 2009
That our current laws AREN’T set up for
Sorry ’bout that-
2:55 pm on August 19th, 2009
Thrasher should pay for what she did, and I sure don’t have a problem with jail and a civil suit
Slander is an untruthful oral (spoken) statement about a person that harms the person’s reputation or standing in the community. Because slander is a tort (a civil wrong), the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement. If the statement is made via broadcast media — for example, over the radio or on TV — it is considered libel, rather than slander, because the statement has the potential to reach a very wide audience.
3:06 pm on August 19th, 2009
The law was set up because they were unable to prosecute Lori Drew under past bullying laws. This law now covers electronic communication as well. Obviously I am playing a bit of Devil’s Advocate (although I do not like the law). The good thing is about laws like this is that they are kinda broad. And this is why we have judges to interpret these laws…just like the one who threw out the jury convictions of Lori Drew.
To me, laws like this, along with the people who think this woman should see the 4 years in jail, are cutting their nose to spite their face. Laws like this will not help anyone and will only further clog our courts with cases involving a man who argued with a teen over a game of Halo.
3:16 pm on August 19th, 2009
bitme, the word you are looking to cut-and-paste the definition for is “libel”. You would also have to prove the teen suffered public contempt, hatred, ridicule, or condemnation and that this teen’s reputation or standing in the community was damaged from the ad placement. I don’t know her reputation or standing in the community, but I doubt this fake ad did anything to harm it.
3:26 pm on August 19th, 2009
bitme, the word you are looking to cut-and-paste the definition for is “libel”. You would also have to prove the teen suffered public contempt, hatred, ridicule, or condemnation and that this teen’s reputation or standing in the community was damaged from the ad placement. I don’t know her reputation or standing in the community, but I doubt this fake ad did anything to harm it.
Actually i thought I had copied both, I wish they could nail her with both. Yeah to be made out as a hooker would hurt her in the community
oh well people can look it up themselves
I still feel she deserves jail time
3:28 pm on August 19th, 2009
My biggest problem with this, is she did it under a “sexual” context. There are so many weirdos in this world and with the internet you can pretty much find anyone these days. If someone had found that encounter and tried to meet up with her at some point, she would have had no clue what’s going on…I don’t think I’m being dramatic when I say that this could have ended badly…
4:01 pm on August 19th, 2009
Hear, hear *applause*
I totally agree with you. This is not a crime, and certainly not one punishable by jail time. I, too, did not agree with the Megan Meier witchunt. Yes, Lori Drew is vile and a bad poster child for this issue, but there is no crime here. Where does it stop? You call someone a name in a drugstore and you get arrested?
I am thrilled to see some sanity regarding this issue. Thank you for providing it.
4:23 pm on August 19th, 2009
I don’t mind seeing her charged with something, at least, though I have no opinion on Megan’s law in particular. I had this sort of thing happen to me when breaking up with an ex. He stalked me for years, and one of the things he did was repeatedly put my name and numbers (including my work number) up on deviant sexual websites. I got numerous calls a day and was terrified. For this to happen to a teenager? This SERIOUSLY could have gone wrong. This wasn’t some cutesy mean thing she did. She could have got the kid hurt, with some perv mistaking her for a hooker and trying to track her down. I think arresting her and scaring her a bit is deserved, at least. Maybe now she’ll grow the fuck up.
4:44 pm on August 19th, 2009
[...] more: Elizabeth Thrasher Faces Four Years Over Craigslist Ad This entry was posted in Cellphone, Gadget and tagged arm-around, bullied-over, cell-phone, [...]
5:35 pm on August 19th, 2009
I agree 100%. She is pretty mean and spiteful for doing this, and I think what she did may fall under the cyberbullying law, albiet loosely interpreted, but as some of you pointed out, that law is poorly written to begin with. I think the prosecutors would have a better chance with identity theft or criminal impersonation, and the victim would have a better chance suing the shit out of her in civil court.
6:23 pm on August 19th, 2009
And why would we keep someone like this in prison when those spots should be reserved for pedophiles and murders that should be given life sentences. Instead, treat her like a parolee. Send her to anger management, get her counseling, and ban her from cyberspace.
(Tongue-in-cheek)
6:38 pm on August 19th, 2009
Releasing criminals has nothing to do with overcrowding, judges and lawyers make the rules and they need the revolving door to keep busy and create more jobs for more judges and lawyers
It’s like gasoline, today crude spiked up on demand, our gasoline supplies are down because of more demand?
Actually they’re refining less and creating a shortage, to keep the price up until the last traveling holiday Labor Day, happens every year, Memorial and Labor Day gasoline price increase is the norm.
Manipulation is where it’s at, Perv’s and DUI’s are made to order for keeping the courts busy, everyone knows they’ll be back, they can’t let them out fast enough to create more jobs and make more money
7:05 pm on August 19th, 2009
Biteme: SO true. Can’t say I like it, but so true….
7:48 pm on August 19th, 2009
Agree!
11:18 pm on August 19th, 2009
The real question is why is her face so round?
11:20 pm on August 19th, 2009
I must admit that Morbid’s post made me decide to finally become a member. Have been a fan of this site for about a year now and love the write-ups, you guys do excellent work.
Typically I agree with Morbid’s perspective on most issues. In this case, I agree that Megan’s law is obviously written loosely and being used for non-applicable situations such as this one. BUT…I do think she (Thrasher) has committed a crime that should be punishable by law. To what extent, I really can’t say without knowing how much information was provided in the Craig’s List ad. The reason I feel she should face consequences is because I believe she put the 17-yr old girl into a dangerous situation by placing her picture and other personal information such as phone number (not sure if she put town or address, hopefully NOT) into a publication that advertises for and attracts – perverts, sexual deviants, weirdos and probably a handful of stalkers and rapists searching for an easy target such as this under-age victim. I truly believe that what Thrasher did could potentially cost this young girl her life if the wrong person gets hold of her information.
Megans’s law is NOT the answer, nor is it applicable in this case. I do not know what law would apply but I do whole-heartedly feel that it was a malicious action on the part Thrasher, who knowingly placed a minor into a dangerous situation with no regard for her safety. JMHO, Shannah
11:20 pm on August 19th, 2009
With an email address and cell phone number, someone could have gotten this girls real name and home address. This woman could have been responsible for a 17 year old girl being raped or murdered. While I don’t think she should be charged under Megan’s Law, or think the law itself is worded properly, I do think there should be some law to cover crimes like this one.
She subjected a minor to lewd language and graphic pictures. Had she forced the girl to watch porn we would be all over her. Instead she put a child into a possibly dangerous situation and should be thanking her lucky stars that nothing worse happened to the girl.
11:30 pm on August 19th, 2009
Bwuahahahaha! Another victim in my web!
12:21 am on August 20th, 2009
First we have laws like in this story then we have THIS: A girl (14) from my daughter’s school took pictures of HERSELF in panties and a bra, sent them to her “boyfriend” before she knew it everyone in the school had seen the pictures. When school officials saw them,the police were called on her and she had to perform community service. The students were told that if it were to happen again, who person in the photos would be charged with child pornography and would have to register as a sex offender….. Now how is that even possible?!?
12:34 am on August 20th, 2009
Victim? Be careful Morbid,that makes you wrong twice in one night…since I am such a sweet and generous person, I am willing to help you through this crisis (admittance is the first step) so lets start by saying (repeat after me): “I, Morbid, was wrong…this is a rare occurrence of course” (tossed that in to massage your ego a bit). Web victims to Morbid: “What was that you said? Can you repeat the statement, please? We couldn’t hear you…sounded like you might have said the word ‘wrong’ in a sentence with your name in it but surely we are mistaken because it came out as a weak gurgling noise, almost as if you were in pain…”
Just picking on you of course
I still think you should re-evaluate your opinion, at least on the consequences of her actions. 4 years would obviously be excessive but perhaps 2 weeks (one in an isolated cell all alone with nothing to do but think about her actions. The other in a cell with about twelve male inmates who spent the previous week having to endure seeing the same Craig’s list ad posted on their wall but with Thrashers picture in a provocative pose instead of the 17-year old’s. Better yet, the 17-yr olds picture up all week and then send Thrasher in with nothing on but a smile). Never mind, that would cruel to the other inmates.
1:44 am on August 20th, 2009
I wonder!! How many pervs, saved the girls photo, printed it out even, along with her cell phone number? An area code and first three prefix numbers will tell you the general area that a person lives, even if the number has been changed. A stalking perv will utilize that, I guarantee it! By Thrashers actions, she has basically forced this girl to change her appearance or constantly be in fear of strangers and abduction!
David Fuller drove all the way to Arkansas from California to abduct Kacie Woody….
Thrasher should be so harrassed and scared for at least 6 months by Berthalove!!
2:33 am on August 20th, 2009
My sentiments exactly! It’s way too easy for some professional stalker/rapist/pedo/crazy fuck to find someone with minimal information. That damage is irreversible.
3:49 am on August 20th, 2009
This is not any 17 year old. I do hope this thrasher woman is ashamed and horribly embarrassed with her family and friends. This seems even more serious crime to me because it is her ex husbands new family.
How I would I feel if my ex’s new g/f did something like this involving one of my children. Certain people might pull a loaded gun. That bitch might just die. I’d start with a restraining order therefore daddy wont be having his kids over. Messing with me is one thing – my children (adults or juveniles) that is crossing the line. It would please me very much to have her off the streets, maybe I could rest peacefully at night.
(2002) My ex’s Jealous g/f, 33 at the time, I hadn’t seen or talked to him, she had the wrong woman still puzzles me – Only she knows why she showed up smashing my door in (sept), next night lundged a boulder threw my front window. months later, pleaded out he, paid damages (Feb). stupid fool(s)! One month (march) later She,left a threatening message on my answering machine. I had an order of protection on her the kids stopped visiting daddy after that.
my ex’s g/f was charged with menacing and violation of TPO (march). Depending on who your lawyer is (later that day made sense why they held her case until last – to cut her a deal). She had a lengthy criminal history had been on house arrest when my ex started living with her (1992). The district police captain, told me she had 6 out of 11 brother/sisters doing life sentences. She got $80 fine + $80 court cost = $160 and she didn’t pay it my ex did. vs same judge same day, There was a 19 year old boy in the court earlier. Charged with menacing only, He had drove to his uncles house demanding money that was owed to him. They gave him 15 days. He had a public defender pleading for him, Said he had never been in trouble before and that he has a full time job. Didn’t make no difference. She asked for a stay on the days and judge denied it too. They took him out in handcuffs. I figured that he probably lost his job because of this.
This made me want to be an advocate for the people, that judge is a crook and what ya going to do about it. If he is doing favors for money or golf buddy(s). Lawyers that has been around for many moons vs. a public defender just starting her career. And that lawyer is my ex’s regular attorney he isn’t cheap. I sat in the court room from beginning of the morning until the last case – very fishy indeed. I still feel bad for that 19 yr old – unfair bull shit.
I think the 4 yr bit is giving the judge some leeway max of 4 yrs … so some situations and conditions, taking in account if the person has other criminal history etc.
This megan law is something to be worried about – if you believe in freedom of speech. But no matter what you do in life I have learned there is a law for any and everything we dont get a manual. They make it up as you go. They want you they going to get you… scary place.
8:02 am on August 20th, 2009
Nope. I do not feel that this woman should be charged with anything other than a misdemeanor. As someone else noted, this girls personal info AND the bra\panty picture were on her Myspace AND she got herself involved with this woman. I am not saying she deserved it, but everyone shares some form of blame, INCLUDING the teen’s parent who obviously has not been monitoring (or didn’t give a shit) about her teen daughter posting sexually suggestive pictures online and getting involved in an online argument with a “grown” woman.
To waste taxpayer time and money while moaning about what “could” have happened…what do you guys think should be next? Get caught speeding and also get arrested for all those people you “could” have killed? Nothing happened to this teen as a result of this woman’s stupid Craigslist ad, so any “oh wow, Thrasher taking that teen’s info off her Myspace and posting them on Craigslist could have awakened a Ted Bundy in Rock Hill, SC who could have taken a trip and then beat the teen’s face in with a log and raped her the anus with a flashlight! OH LAWDY!” has no bearing on this discussion and why the woman was arrested to begin with.
She was arrested for “harassment” under a law made for cyberbullying. I do not think it will fly, nor do I think it should. This woman did not seek out the teen, and as I am sure will come out in court, the teen put herself into the equation. The fact that this teen could have done the same thing to an adult with an ESTABLISHED career and not faced anything but a misdemeanor charge is just dumb. You can hate on Thrasher all you want, no doubt she is an idiot for doing what she did. But she does not deserve felony harassment charges over this.
8:21 am on August 20th, 2009
Anybody consider that with all the violence solicited from craigslist lately that she was hoping for more?
The law itself is inappropriate but this adult woman meant to cause harm &/or distress to a minor,and impersonated her to do it.
I doubt this was her only action (maybe a retaliation?) this is just the one she got caught for and the da was itching to use the new law.
Obviously she is an immature person but she may need the supervision of probation as well as community service to learn to control her actions
Think you got something worth saying? Type it out. If you don't wanna look lame, get rid of that default avatar and go get you a gravatar! Tell 'em Morbid sent ya'. Lastly, as far as we are concerned, posting a comment means that you have read our Disclaimer.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Search Dreamin’ Demon
Login
The Dreamin Demon Wants You
Check ‘Em Out!
Recent Comments
Recent Media Reviews
Twitter
Your Ad Here
Facebook Crap
Drink The Kool-Aid
Archives
Kickass Sites
Copyright © 2009 · Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License · DreaminDemon Blood Red theme by Lee Malta.
Get a Blog · WordPress · Log in