Jesse Woodson Cyberbullying Case

dealing with cyberbullying and the internet; therefore, it must rely on Case Law from before the

According to Bulent Dilmac, “bullying is defined as aggression with the intention of hurting (Kepenekci & Çınkır, 2003) and is an anti-social form of behavior that produces negative consequences (Taylor, 2006).” “Cyberbullying is defined as the repetitive use of information and communication technologies by an individual or a group in order to hurt other individuals. (Akbaba & Eroǧlu, 2013).” There have been several cases where cyberbullying causes teenagers to take their own life’s (commit suicide). It can cause individuals to suppress negative emotions within them. Lowering their self-esteem and looking at life with a sense of hopelessness. Jessica Laney was a victim of cyberbullying when she was insulted on social media.

The first amendment of the United States Constitution is the right of free speech. So, should people get prosecuted for cyberbullying, even though it violates the first amendment? Although cyberbullying is wrong it shouldn’t be charged as a federal crime because it is not physically hurting someone it is emotionally hurting them.

“...1 in 3 teens [have] admitted to being a victim of cyberbullying…” says child psychologist, Eden Foster, in reference to a survey, talked about in “The Dangers of Cyberbullying” by Brett Warke, that shows the absolute significance of cyberbullying in this day and age. Cyberbullying on social media is everywhere and it’s about time that someone took some action against it, and, in this case, taking legal action via prosecution may be the best way to go. Let it not be said that cyberbullying and bullying are different, infact, the only difference is the platform they take place on. Cyberbullying is done with the same malicious intent as face-to-face bullying is done with: the intent to hurt a victim in a psychological or physical way- showing

The law is failing to correctly convict criminals of their crime. A 21-year-old man was sentenced to community service under stalking laws for sending threatening text messages to a 17-year-old boy who later committed suicide. Despite the medium of offence (cyber), and the severe consequences and seriousness of the crime, the 21-year-old man’s sentencing was convicted fairly leniently but also under stalking laws (which is completely unrelated to the offence committed). Former chief justice of the Family Court, Alistair Nicholson, says the laws has failed to deal with the growing problems of cyber bullying, and that there needs to be more specific cyber-bulling laws, as published in a news article by ABC News. Nicholson further reinforces the notion that our laws are failing to correctly convict criminals in his statements, “In the state system, you tend to get it in the stalking area and you may also with some of the sexually explicit communications get into breaches of pornography” and “[This leads] to children…being placed on sexual offences registers when yet it is some stupid piece of adolescent behaviour that has nothing to do with the sort of behaviour that those registers are aimed at”. The unreliability of the law to convict a criminal of the actual crime committed, and the inability of the law to recognise and protect an individual’s right is manifested, thus exhibiting the incompetency of legal responses at addressing online harassment. The law as it currently stands may result in a harsher conviction than what is rightfully deserved by a criminal, hence it does not reflect community standards and

Technology―it’s the focal point of our lives, from sending a quick text to checking the latest news. But the real debate comes when the conversation switches to cyberbullying, which is customarily described as an act that is “repeated, hostile, and severe with the intent to embarrass, threaten, or harass” (“The Dangers of Cyberbullying” by Warnke, lines 26-27). Bullies in the real world can and do get prosecuted, so what makes this any difference. In some cases, the bullying is so deleterious that the victim commits suicide. If all of this can be prevented, then lives will be saved and children will be able to live without the fear of being bullied. The three sources “The Dangers of Cyberbullying” by Brett Warnke, “Sacrificing the First Amendment

Bullying doesn’t exist in high school anymore, maybe when we were little but not in this day in time. A principal suspended seven students from her school because they were “ cyberbullying and disrupting the school environment”. The First Amendment to the Constitution says “Congress shall make no law… abridging (limiting) the freedom of speech. Should Schools be Allowed to Limit Students’ Online Speech. No, schools should not limit students online speech cyberbullying does not affect most students and teachers, cyberbullying is very disruptive to schools, freedom of speech is a sacred right.

This paper addresses a situation in which a student notified this author that she was being subjected to bullying through another classmate’s Facebook page. A discussion of steps required by Oregon’s statutes, the Lake Oswego School District 's board policies and the student handbook, will provide a basis for examining any First Amendment arguments that the bullying has raised, with a discussion of the author 's First Amendment responses consistent with applicable Supreme Court cases.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution focuses on five rights guaranteed to to Americans. Freedom of Speech is one of the five rights that individuals use to justify their actions online. Consequently, a person being accused of cyberbullying is often pardoned for their actions. Despite the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, cyberbullies should not be protected by this amendment when accused of cyberbullying another person because of the effects it has on the victim.

Schools and the public are wasting time and resources on the over-exaggerated issue of cyberbullying. Today, schools are wasting much of their time worrying about cyberbullying and in popular media it’s mentioned too much. Schools should not be allowed to limit online speech. It’s not needed since most students haven’t been cyberbullied, cyberbullying hasn’t been proven to be very disruptive and online gossip is not common.

After receiving the anonymous tip Principle Lyon pulled Cruman into his office and pressured him to sign in to his facebook account for two and a half hours. This course of action took by the principle is unlawful and therefore the evidence obtained should not be used in court. In the case Moreno v. Hanford Sentinel Inc. Moreno had posted her personal views on her private social media account. Hanford reposted Moreno’s views and this lead to threats to Moreno. When this happened Moreno sued Hanford because when Hanford reposted such things it violated Morenos privacy. Crumans facebook account was a very private and exclusive account and when principle Lyon Pressured Cruman for two and half an hours to sign in was a serious violation. In the Moreno v. Hanford Sentinel Inc. case they said in order to prove a violation of privacy on social media you must establish 1. A legally protected

The case, Elonis vs. United States, conveys that threats on social media are a crime. In this court case, the convict quoted a rapper’s song on social media towards his wife and the FBI. Whether or not the convict intentionally meant what he threatened, the representatives

Furthermore, prosecuting individuals for statements made on the internet would squander taxpayers’ money. As “The Dangers of Cyber bullying” noted, “Congresswoman Linda Sanchez is sponsoring the Megan Meier Cyber Bullying Prevention Act.” Although some may say that financing the court system for the prosecution of “social media bullies” is necessary, it is proven that will also waste money and time. Surely, individuals should not be penalized for statements made on the internet.

Schools today are constantly updating their code of conduct due to cases involving cyberbullying. The average teenager has a social media account and can easily access the account at any given time. Many teenagers rely on social media for various reasons which then increases the potential for cyber bullying to occur. Cyberbullying can be seen on such media like, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and Snapchat. Cases of cyberbullying between teenagers have created a great dilemma upon parents and school districts. Since online bullying is not done face to face, the bully feels more daring and aggression towards the victim. Most of these cases have ended in tragedy and were not taken care of correctly by administration at schools. Bullying and harassment

In this newspaper article, the author helps the reader understand and how to treat cyber bullying. The author explains what bullying is and how it is modernized to become cyber bullying. The article informs the reader of main point, in a brief but effective description about recognizing and treating cyber bullying. The author show great statistical research on her topic but not enough the emotional appeal. It provides good use to my research because of the extensive use on how it should be treated.