Written by: Jay D. Hall
Edited by: Stefanie Herrington, Amy E. Seely

On May 15, 2008, federal prosecutors in Los Angeles filed charges against Lori Drew for her role in a Myspace hoax that led to the suicide of 13-year-old Megan Meier. Ms. Drew told police that she created a Myspace account for the sole purpose of communicating with Megan in order to find out what Megan had been saying about Drew’s teenage daughter. Drew admitted that she, along with a temporary employee, Ashley, created the profile of a “good looking male” named Josh in order to befriend Megan. Soon, the communications became “sexual for a thirteen year old.”

The internet relationship soon took a nasty turn. After receiving messages ending the online romance that included accusations that Megan was promiscuous and a statement that “the world would be better off without you,” Megan committed suicide by hanging herself in her bedroom closet. Tina Meier, Megan’s mother, remembers with regret a conversation she had with her daughter about her online communications. Meir said Megan was “looking for me to help calm herself down like I always did…but I was upset at the language she was using.” Megan’s last words to her mother were, “You’re supposed to be my mom, you’re supposed to be on my side.” Then she stormed upstairs, where Mrs. Meier found her daughter’s lifeless body shortly thereafter.

Following Megan’s suicide and an ensuing investigation, Ms. Drew was indicted by a grand jury on charges of conspiracy and accessing protected computers without authorization to get information used to inflict emotional distress. Drew admits that “communication between the fake male profile and Megan was aimed at gaining Megan’s confidence. Mrs. Meier noted her daughter struggled with self-esteem issues, but after receiving messages from “Josh” telling her she was “pretty,” Megan seemed thrilled. Mrs. Meier also said that when “Josh” broke off the relationship, Megan was devastated.

Initially, when her involvement came to light, Drew was apologetic about her role in Megan’s death; she even sent Megan’s parents a written apology. She didn’t anticipate being held criminally responsible for the suicide. Even the prosecutor from St. Charles County, where all of the events took place, stated there was no law under which she could be charged. Federal prosecutors, however, disagreed and brought criminal charges against Ms. Drew.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by: John Deininger
Researched by: Nick Caleb
Edited by: Jeff Hinman, Lauren E. Trent

The city of Los Angeles is cracking down on drugs. It filed criminal charges against officials of two companies allegedly importing and distributing poisonous toothpaste. As it so happens, the poisonous chemical diethylene glycol, is better suited for cooling engines than improving dental hygiene. Finding antifreeze in toothpaste conjures images of Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, and people falling into rendering vats. Didn’t the public outrage resulting from the book and the leadership of one of the greatest U.S. Presidents (Teddy Roosevelt) help create food and drug regulations to prevent such egregious violations of law? Yes, but there’s a lot to regulate.

The Food Drug and Cosmetics Act required manufacturers to demonstrate a product’s safety, and granted the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) broad powers to regulate food, drugs, and cosmetics. How the FDA classifies a product has important ramifications for the regulation and approval process. When it comes to FDA approval and regulation, the product’s primary use is the determining factor.

The FDA considers toothpaste a drug. That seems like an obvious and straightforward concept, but, surprisingly, ambiguity exists. Toothpaste could seemingly be either a drug or a cosmetic because it is used to protect your teeth, but also to keep them looking nice. A product is a drug if 1) drug-like effects are foreseeable in large groups of people, 2) consumers use the product predominantly for its significant pharmacological effects, or 3) manufacturers know that the product will be used for these drug-like effects. Cosmetics manufacturers, on the other hand, must simply declare their ingredients, not make any false claims on the packaging, and use safe chemicals. Since pretty teeth are more of a byproduct of the action of toothpaste’s chemicals, like fluoride, it’s out of Clinique land and into the realm of Tylenol.

While toothpaste comes in many flavors, as far as the FDA is concerned there are only two flavors of drugs: over-the-counter and prescription. Whichever category a drug falls into will determine the amount of hoops a company has to jump through to get it approved. Most toothpaste, including the one containing the coolant, is over-the-counter, but some toothpastes are only available by prescription. So where does the FDA draw the line?
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by: Kimberly Brandt
Researched by: Nick Caleb
Edited by: Edward S. Bushnell and Stefanie Herrington

Teenagers often do things they later regret, but these days such mistakes can quickly reach a global audience. One incident that has graced the headlines involves two Wisconsin teenagers, Alex Phillips and his ex-girlfriend (referred to as “HLK”). In a breakup that turned ugly, Phillips posted pictures on his Myspace account that HLK had taken of herself and emailed to him several months prior to the incident. What’s illegal about that? According to the complaint, the first picture was full frontal nudity and the second of her genital area, to which Phillips added his own colorful caption. And since HLK is a mere 16 years old, the criminal issue pops up. When police contacted Phillips and requested that he take the pictures down, warning him that he could go to jail for refusing, Phillips reportedly replied, “f*** that, I am keeping them up.” Though Phillips did later take down the photographs, the “venting” teenager now faces charges for possession of child pornography, sexual exploitation of a child, and defamation.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by: Tom Borton
Researched by: Jeff W. Richards
Edited by: Jay Hall, Stefanie Herrington, and Amy E. Seely

Over the past few centuries, this country has seen vigorous debate about what kinds of marriages should be recognized valid. As early as 1664, anti-miscegenation laws criminalized marriages between whites and black slaves. In 1862, Congress passed the Morrill Act, which prohibited polygamy. Since the 1970’s, courts have permitted laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples. Today, anti-miscegenation laws have been fully repudiated, but debate continues regarding same-sex marriage, and recent events in California and across the nation have fueled the fire.

On May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court decided In Re Marriage Cases, allowing same-sex couples to marry. That decision has stirred two old debates back to life. First, if a same-sex couple legally marries in one state, must other states recognize that union? Will statutes banning same-sex marriage soon be just a speed-bump on the U.S. road to marital bliss? Second, will state recognition of homosexual marriages lead to anti-polygamy laws bring overturned? Will plural marriage follow from gay marriage? The path ahead is unclear. Is Gay Marriage a Slippery Slope or an Even Playing Field?
Read the rest of this entry »