"Outing" cyberbullies - vigilante justice or well-deserved karma?

[Sarahkka]

Many of you may have heard of or seen the tragic video posted by Amanda Todd, a 15-year old girl who was victimized by an online sexual predator and then further traumatized by bullying and harassment after he circulated topless pictures of her to her friends and family. The bullying she endured over that went on for several years, and she eventually took her own life when she couldn't take it any more.

If you did read about it, you may have recently heard that Anonymous has unmasked the perpetrator and that this unsavoury individual may be in for a public shaming at least, and potentially far more serious consequences if mob justice gets carried away.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...10/15/bc-amanda-todd-tormentor-anonymous.html

What are your thoughts on this?

Is it high time that cyberbullies and trolls face some consequences for their vile behaviour online? If they can no longer feel safe behind their online anonymity, will they think twice about their online behaviour? Or could public outing result in violence or worse, rather than appropriate justice?

 

[Sarahkka]

I think I would have preferred that Anonymous had sent the perp's info to the police, rather than published his address. I want serious consequences, but I would rather use our justice system than let mob justice rule.
I also support the actions of this woman I just heard about on the news:
The woman went to post a message of condolence on an Amanda Todd Memorial FB page and like many of us, was appalled at some of the things written there. One man in particular said some awful things. She clicked on his profile and he had his work info listed. She looked up the contact info for his work place, sent a copy of his comments to the company with a note saying, "you might be interested in what one of your employees left as a public comment on a memorial site", and the guy got fired over it.
I say, good for her. We have to start demanding some online decency. Despicable online behaviour like that deserves some real life consequences.
And at the end of the day, the guy has himself to blame for his behaviour as he was the one who left his information public.

 

[JASMAK]

Ithink shaming is a bit barbaric HOWEVER, if propers steps arent there to punish those who do this, people will take lengths to find their own punishments.

 

[smelly07]

I agree that more needs to be done regarding cyberbullies and trolls, of course if they no longer feel safe online they will think twice about what they do and if the punishment is harsh enough this would also help - i dont agree with the public or even media giving out names and address's and definietly think our justice system should deal with it, not the public.


I think Parents need to control what their children are accessing via the internet and educate them constantly about the bad things that can happen and what to be wary of.

 

[Sarahkka]

Is having an anonymous username the problem?
Should forums and facebook pages require people to use their real names?

 

[Jaylynne]

It's karma definitely but not the proper route to justice. Even though if someone I knew and loved was bullied I'd feel strongly that he was outed.

 

[Twister]

I do think there needs to be concequences for cyber bullies and trolls. They seem to think that being anon gives them the freedom to say some disgusting things towards and about other people, things that they may not say in real life but because they're 'hidden' behind a computer screen they think they're protected. Just because things aren't said face to face doesn't mean people can't get hurt. However I think it's something that needs to be dealt with by the police and justice system and not by the general public.

 

[Tiff]

Well, you know my thoughts on this.

I've taken screenshots of every sick and disgusting comment made about this girl, and have/will forward them to their place of employment or family members (if I can deduce who they are from their friends list).

The comments people are making are awful. She was a slut. She deserved to die. She made a mistake (when she was 12!! A 30 year old perv coerced her to flash him on webcam. She did, he took a screenshot and then used that to torment her. Threatened her with making the pictures public if she didn't give him a full "show". She refused, so he did. She switched schools. He found her. Unreal!

As far as I'm concerned, if you have the "guts" to go online and make fun of someone who took their life, then you are not entitled to any sort of common curtosey that I would give someone else. Sick and tired of these little shits who sit behind their computer screens talking smack.

I want them to know that their words ARE accountable. I've argued with a few of them, but believe you me... when I post that I know where their address is with their place of employment, all the bravado stops and they revert back to their actual age. Its kids! One kid was 13 who was spouting off such nasty stuff about her.

As a parent, I'd want to know if my daughter was online bullying people and being disrespectful.

 

[Sarahkka]

For me, that's not being a vigilante, Tiff.
Outing them is standing up to bullies. It is forcing them to be accountable to their real life communities for the things that they are posting. It is a way of demanding that public online spaces have an expectation of decency - just as we have by-laws to ensure decent behaviour in real public spaces.
The kind of outing that Anonymous is doing does worry me a little, though. Posting the identity and address of the perp could lead to violent acts against him. I would rather that Anon had let the police deal with that, I think.

And I completely agree that I would want to know, too, if it were my kid doing these things. I bet you that most of these parents would be shocked and mortified if they realized how their kids were behaving online.

 

[Tiff]

I agree! In looking up stuff its being reported now that the first guy exposed by Anonymous looks to be false. Apparently Anonymous's statement is that they didn't care if they were wrong on this guy as he's already being charged with pedophile stuff.

That is a bit scary. Although if I'm honest, with the amount of notoriety that this case has, if they do arrest or find the intital people responsible I don't know if they CAN release their names. There'd be so much backlash. Sticky situation for the police for sure.

 

[vaniilla]

I don't think anyone should be entitled to anonymity online if they're doing something illegal/abusive, the laws should still stand regardless of the format that the abuse comes in, you could argue most crime is anonymous - a mugger on the street won't leave a card neither will a burglar, yet they get caught and brought to justice - the same should be done with cyber bullies, I don't agree with names going to the media especially before a verdict because potentially innocent people could be getting publicly shamed for nothing but I do think everybody involved should be made fully aware including the school heads of the bullies. I think afterwards though it's a good thing for the story to go public - not the full identity of the bully but enough to send out a message and so that parent's become more aware of the real risks/effects of cyber bullies.

 

[aliss]

I'm afraid I can't agree with it.

Don't get me wrong, I really do think this guy needs to go to hell. BTW for those unfamiliar with this case, it is not just bullying, it involves extortion, child pornography, etc.

But the thing is, he was not a young offender - if the group had forwarded the information to the RCMP and they were able to charge him (and he would have been, absolutely, this case is massive in Canada right now and it would have been easy to track him) then his name would have been published when the charges were laid.

Unfortunately it DOES happen when people are falsely accused, which is why the police do not name people until charges are laid (which is a matter of public record by LAW rather than naming the guilty). It absolutely happens. 99% of the time, yes, it sticks - but there is always those who are falsely accused but the community WILL consider them guilty, making their lives hell.

 

[louandivy]

I'm afraid I can't agree with it.

Don't get me wrong, I really do think this guy needs to go to hell. BTW for those unfamiliar with this case, it is not just bullying, it involves extortion, child pornography, etc.

But the thing is, he was not a young offender - if the group had forwarded the information to the RCMP and they were able to charge him (and he would have been, absolutely, this case is massive in Canada right now and it would have been easy to track him) then his name would have been published when the charges were laid.

Unfortunately it DOES happen when people are falsely accused, which is why the police do not name people until charges are laid (which is a matter of public record by LAW rather than naming the guilty). It absolutely happens. 99% of the time, yes, it sticks - but there is always those who are falsely accused but the community WILL consider them guilty, making their lives hell.

So are suspected criminals not allowed to be named in Canada? I wonder if it is different in the U.K. There was an awful case a few years ago of a girl that was murderered and a university lecturer was accused, his face was printed all over the media and he turned out to be completely innocent after a few weeks I think that it is so unethical tbh.

Also I absolutely do not agree with vigilante justice!

 

[aliss]

I'm afraid I can't agree with it.

Don't get me wrong, I really do think this guy needs to go to hell. BTW for those unfamiliar with this case, it is not just bullying, it involves extortion, child pornography, etc.

But the thing is, he was not a young offender - if the group had forwarded the information to the RCMP and they were able to charge him (and he would have been, absolutely, this case is massive in Canada right now and it would have been easy to track him) then his name would have been published when the charges were laid.

Unfortunately it DOES happen when people are falsely accused, which is why the police do not name people until charges are laid (which is a matter of public record by LAW rather than naming the guilty). It absolutely happens. 99% of the time, yes, it sticks - but there is always those who are falsely accused but the community WILL consider them guilty, making their lives hell.

So are suspected criminals not allowed to be named in Canada? I wonder if it is different in the U.K. There was an awful case a few years ago of a girl that was murderered and a university lecturer was accused, his face was printed all over the media and he turned out to be completely innocent after a few weeks I think that it is so unethical tbh.

Also I absolutely do not agree with vigilante justice!

You can print their name/photo if they are formally charged & over 18 (you cannot if they are under 18).

If the photo/name is printed without formal charges then whoever prints it can be liable for civil action. Ie. If you print someone's picture and call them a pedophile, you can be sued. If you print their name/photo and say they are formally charged with sexually assaulting a child, and they ARE, then it is legal. But they also cannot be labeled a "pedophile" in the media until after a conviction.

 

[Tiff]

One way to get around it is to say "allegedly", therefore you aren't actually saying they did it... just that there's question. Although I don't think you can even do that before they've been formally charged.

 

[Sarahkka]

So right alongside Amanda Todd's tragic story, the local news runs an item about a mum feeling somewhat uneasy because a modelling agency scouted her 14-year old daughter over facebook.
I listened to the interview and all I could think was, "how would they be able to scout her unless she has her privacy settings at public?"
Sure enough, they were.
So call me paranoid, but I would NEVER have my facebook open to the public. A facebook profile is a goldmine of information to any unsavoury character that might want to do anything from stealing your identity to stalking you. To me, it is like leaving my house doors wide open while I am away. It feels very vulnerable.
So hearing that this young girl, who was pretty eye-catching, by the way - there's a reason the modelling agency contacted her - has her profile wide open to the world made my jaw drop.
She is 14! What are her parents thinking?!
I don't know. Am I over the top here? That just seems like a serious lack of prudence and discretion on their part. Like, if a modelling agency contacted your kid and it made you feel uneasy that they were surfing through facebook and scouting, should it not give you pause to think about who else might be able to have access to her?
My boys may hate me for it, but there will be HUGE restrictions on their use of social media. HUGE!!!!

 

[Tiff]

I'm the same Sarah. I don't even know when I'll let Claire have Facebook. My settings are all private, but that's because I have a whackjob of an ex boyfriend who stalked me for awhile.

I think there was a thing done here (could be mistaken about the place) but there's this group or a person who goes to high schools and has a seminar with the parents and in it he shows the parents just how easy it is to get into people's Facebook accounts. Most of the parents were shocked to see the pictures their kids had up on their FBs, as they were "friends" of their children and not realizing that the kids can block them from seeing stuff.

Then the guy had the kids come in and show THEM how open their profiles were.


Social media (while fun as an adult) is really scary IMHO when it comes to kiddos.

 

[Ozzieshunni]

I read this thread last night, but was on my ipad and didn't feel like typing out a reply

I feel that with the advent of the internet, laws need to change to encompass the new ways people can assault and harass others. Many states and countries still do not recognize cyber bullying as a crime because there are no laws surrounding it and it's often considered freedom of speech.

My internet usage was always monitored. I had to use the computer in the living room. It was a good choice on the part of my parents and one I will be implimenting with my own son when he comes of age.

Facebook's current policy is 13 and over can have one. If parents are creating them for their children, then they should be held responsible. I personally would report any page I knew being used by an under 13.

Again, parents are responsible for monitoring what their children do. It's so unfortunate that this happened to this girl. I'm sure her family are in shock. Bullying is a horrible epidemic in this day and age.

I don't think that his name should have been released, but I hope he is charged with sexual coercion of a minor child.

 

[aliss]

It was more than coercion, he did actually forward the picture to others when she didn't comply (including family & friends), so distributing child pornography. She was only 12 in the pics I think

 

[Ozzieshunni]

It was more than coercion, he did actually forward the picture to others when she didn't comply (including family & friends), so distributing child pornography. She was only 12 in the pics I think

Sematics, Aliss, lmao. Yes, I know it was distribution of child pornography.