Man Used Kik Messaging App To Share Child Porn Of His 1-Year-Old StepdaughterMan Fatally Shot Wife In Front Of Their Children At Indoor Play CenterMan Beat 4-Month-Old Daughter To Death Because She Was CryingParents Charged After Their Dead Baby Found Rotting In Baby SwingWoman Smothered Daughter For Talking Back, Tossed Body In DumpsterMan Accused Of Severely Beating Toddler Because She Interrupted Video GameTexas Woman Arrested After Fatally Shooting Her Two DaughtersTeen Girl Killed Newborn By Shoving Rock Down Baby's ThroatElderly Man Killed Himself With Chainsaw After Attacking His Wife With HatchetTeen Posted Selfies With Murdered Teacher Before Killing Self With Circular Saw

SMITHFIELD, R.I. — A teenage student at Smithfield High School has been charged with cyberstalking after creating a fake Facebook account to harass another student.

The 15-year-old girl created a fake account pretending to be a fellow student who was born missing part of her foot. The account was created under the name “Halfafoot” with the victim’s last name and birth date. Accompanying the profile was a picture of a bloody, severed foot.

After police figured out who was responsible for the posting, the affidavit states they went to the teen’s home where her father was “annoyed and rude,” referring the police to the phone number of a law office. Detectives confiscated three computers from the home instead.

Police really took this seriously and questioned 2 of the 26 “friends” listed on the fake account and were able to get a clearer picture of how the profile was created and why.

A female Smithfield High sophomore told the police that the account was created Nov. 6 by the 15-year-old and a male Burrillville High School student on her home computer while she was taking a shower, the affidavit shows. The teenager told the police that she told the two to take the page down, that it “was wrong.” They all then left for a Providence College basketball game.

They went on to explain that they wanted to remove the page before they left, but that the 15-year-old girl took the password with her and told them she did not want the page removed because she wanted to see the responses to the friend requests she had sent.

The student is now facing charges of cyberstalking and using false information. If found guilty, and since it is a first offense, she’s looking at a misdemeanor charge facing a $500 fine and one year in prison, or both.

Hey, don’t get me wrong, I don’t condone this type of crap. But man, is the girl with the partial foot the police chief’s daughter or something? That’s one hell of a response over a fake Facebook account.

Help The Dreamin Demon go ad free! Support us on Patreon!
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments


The views expressed in the comments are those of the comment writers and don't represent the views or opinions of D'D or its staff. Feel free to flag comments that may violate conditions outlined in our Disclaimer.

  • Anonymous

    Its just going to keep on getting crazier from here Morbid the police dont know how to properly police the internet. Making fun of a kid with half a foot isn’t even funny. Thats retarded in it’s self she should have to pay $500 just for being so stupid.

  • HotReadingMama

    People can be charged for this???

    I have a few in mind 🙂

  • Bulletproof

    I agree that it was a messed up things for these kids to do, but feel like the cyberstalking charges were probably filed because of the teen and her parents attitude towards the cops when they came questioning..

    At least they didn’t take it to the level these teens from my neck of the woods did…

    http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2011110113028

  • Zibarro aka Kryssa

    Wait… what???

    “Some of the pictures on the Facebook page depicted the victim’s head photo-shopped onto the body of a young half-nude child and depicted the victim about to perform sex acts, according to the report.”

    If I’m reading correctly, they would have had to FIND a pic of a half-nude “child” about to perform sex acts! That is child porn!

    My question for ALL these Facebook stories is this: WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE PARENTS AND WHY AREN’T THEY PARENTING??!! Is Facebook/internet the babysitter of this current generation like TV and video games were for the last few? Are the parents just content that the kids aren’t bugging *them*? The “dad” in this story sounds like an uppity douche bag who needs to be knocked down a few notches.
    These girls are “cyberbullies” who hide behind a computer screen and think they are untouchable. I say fine them and punish them by taking away their computers and other access to internet activities.

  • Zibarro aka Kryssa

    Wait… what???

    “Some of the pictures on the Facebook page depicted the victim’s head photo-shopped onto the body of a young half-nude child and depicted the victim about to perform sex acts, according to the report.”

    If I’m reading correctly, they would have had to FIND a pic of a half-nude “child” about to perform sex acts! That is child porn!

    My question for ALL these Facebook stories is this: WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE PARENTS AND WHY AREN’T THEY PARENTING??!! Is Facebook/internet the babysitter of this current generation like TV and video games were for the last few? Are the parents just content that the kids aren’t bugging *them*? The “dad” in this story sounds like an uppity douche bag who needs to be knocked down a few notches.
    These girls are “cyberbullies” who hide behind a computer screen and think they are untouchable. I say fine them and punish them by taking away their computers and other access to internet activities.

  • Bulletproof

    You got it Kryssa, I couldnt believe it when I didn’t see a child porn charge added on to those girls. This is the same sheriff’s office who pressed child charges on a 15 year old girl who had nude photos of herself on a phone that they confiscated from HER. Crazy…

  • Farce_scape

    “Hey, don’t get me wrong, I don’t condone this type of crap. But man, is the girl with the partial foot the police chief’s daughter or something? That’s one hell of a response over a fake Facebook account”

    Agreed….
    But, with all the cyber-bullying related teen suicides in recent years, I think we are about to start seeing the pendulum swing in the direction of ‘huge overreaction’ in terms of aggressively prosecuting these bullies!

    Plus, there really IS something *especially* horrible about this little bitch making the topic of the fake facebook page revolve around ridiculing her victim’s birth defect, yah know???
    Teenaged girls WITHOUT physical deformities tend to be woefully sensitive and hypercritical of their own physical appearances, this kind of public humiliation can really crush a kid.
    This girl-bully is really cruel and soulless, in my opinion.
    Not to mention, passive aggressive and cowardly, since, I imagine, she took NO public credit for ANY of her word-vomit!
    Her victim, was left in a position where she didn’t even necessarily know who was attacking her, or who to confront. THAT sucks!

  • Athena

    As I said in the forums, child porn laws were established to deal with those manufacturing, trafficking and possessing nude images of children for the sake of sexual gratification. What these kids did was super douchey, but it wouldn’t benefit ANYONE to ruin their lives by stretching child porn laws this far and requiring these kids to register as sex offenders for god knows how long.

    These kids won’t learn their lesson unless they receive reasonable punishment for their behavior. Hitting the nail with a sledgehammer by bringing child porn charges into this would only accomplish making it more difficult for them to ever become productive, decent citizens. After all, child porn charges will make it impossible to get into a good college or employer.

  • Anonymous

    If the police felt her parents were going to handle this, maybe the police would have gone easier on her. But if they’re going to act like what she did is excusable, then someone has to set her straight.

    Oh god though, if I had done something like this, my parents would have helped the cops cuff me.

  • Anonymous

    i dunno, a good education and a decent job are privileges to be earned, not rights to be handed out to every douchey kid regardless of past transgressions. if they really care about being good citizens later on they can make their contribution from whichever tax bracket they wind up in – all they need to do is stop doing shitty things

  • Farce_scape

    No.
    Child porn laws were established to *protect* children from being *exploited* by those who would manufacture, traffic, possess, or distribute nude (or otherwise sexually explicit) images for the purpose of sexual gratification.
    By photoshopping a child-porn image of pre-pubescent girl performing a sex act, and pasting their intended victim’s head onto it, these teens both manufactured AND distributed child pornography.

    This may seem a small difference, but it actually has huge consequences.
    If the law was aimed ONLY at punishing the “end-user” of the sexually explicit image (ie. the pedophile) then a disinterested third party passing along the image for the purpose of making money alone, could not be held accountable.

    It really doesn’t matter if these teens were *personally* sexually gratified by the image.
    They contributed to the sexual exploitation of the child in the original image AND intended to publicly humiliate their victim with it as well.
    I think it IS worthy of a child pornography charge, for that reason!

    The criminal justice system in the U.S. has no problem charging teens (and even younger children) as ADULTS when they commit serious crimes, such as murder.
    Why should this be any different?

  • Anonymous

    The thing here is that the bully, by reading the actions of the dad is 1 of those kids that in their parents’ eyes can do no wrong, a spoiled little bitch like the one that featured here for throwing a hissyfit & slamming her baby on the sidewalk, smacking her mom & having a pissed off look on her mugshot for being arrested.

    This girl won’t learn her lesson because her parents will prevent her from doing so, she will continue to be a nasty self entitled horror until she’s alone cause her family died. We’ll see her here in a few years for assault at least. She’ll probably get community service & she might even get daddy to do so.

  • Farce_scape

    Another thing I’m wondering is…. where they got the original image of the child about to perform a sex act.

    I mean, in THEORY, this kind of image shouldn’t be THAT easy to find or stumble upon…

    Don’t pedophiles sharing these images often use elaborate methods of disguising their IP addresses, form groups that require their ‘members’ to submit child porn images before they have access, and/or use peer to peer networks to avoid being detected by LE???

    Does a parent of one of these teens have child porn images on a computer hard-drives that the kids had access to, or something???

    Hopefully, LE is taking a careful look at these kids AND the kids parents, and have confiscated all computers related to the incident.
    I find this really disturbing!

  • In your example, disinterested third-parties just trying to profit would still be legally culpable because they produced the images with the intention of someone else using it for sexual gratification. The teens in this case never meant for anything sexual to come of their photoshopping. It does no good to have a sex offender charge on their records for something like this.

  • Athena

    So let them earn the privilege of a good education and career. To slap child porn charges on their record would rob them of the ability to do so in the future. And for what… because they pulled a nasty prank? Such a sentence would hardly fit the crime.

  • Farce_scape

    @ Megan McDonell:
    Yes, I do see your point about passing along an image to an end user who would use it for sexual gratification.

    But, I disagree with your statement:
    “The teens in this case never meant for anything sexual to come of their photoshopping.”

    They produced a sexualized image of their victim. They knew it was a demeaning and was a sexualized image, and intended it to be viewed as such.

    Did they specifically intend for pedophiles to see it, and get their jollies from, their “photo-art”?
    Probably not.
    More likely, it was intended to suggest that their victim is NOT sexually-developed, that she is therefore NOT “sexy”, and that it would be DISGUSTING to view her as such…

    But, at 15 and 16 years old, they should be able to understand WHY further publishing of a photo of a little girl being sexually abused—with or WITHOUT—that little girl’s face obscured, is wrong!

    When they re-published that picture—no matter their intent—these girls contributed to that little girl’s exploitation… No?

  • Pingback: Geo-tagging and cyberstalking | Risk Management and Compliance()