Are peoples using the internet to have a go on "their" issue.
Trial by Media and even more rampant, by the internet, would have no holds barred and what is put up on the internet and public domain cannot be restrained that easily.
Examples, of lynching on the net
The case of a woman who was thrown to a Korean cyber lynch mob for failing to clean up the mess her dog had left behind has put the international spotlight on the country’s sometimes vicious online community.
"Subway Fracas Escalates into Test of the Internet's Power to Shame,” the Washington Post headlined a story on the "Dog Poop Girl" on Thursday. The paper said the incident revealed the power of the Internet and provided "a peek into an unsettling corner of the future" of the cyberworld, in turn sparking debate among experts and bloggers in the U.S.
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200507/200507080017.html
What about using the net to deliver a verdict
When his mother’s inheritance was apparently stolen by his belated stepfather’s best friend, author Ian Coburn was shocked to learn from authorities that such incidents occur frequently. It’s a crisis that flies under the radar.
In an effort to immediately warn the public of this epidemic, Ian created a website on April 1st, sharing the full story of the loss of his mother’s inheritance. In an added twist, the site invites viewers to vote on the perpetrator’s guilt or innocence after reviewing posted documented evidence. Could this be a new wave? Trial by Internet? Currently, 130 votes have been cast.
The site is www.saveinheritance.com. Visitors to the site are encouraged to use it to segue way into a discussion of the arrangements for their demise, as well as their parents’ and grandparents’, where applicable.
http://www.prlog.org/10066761-trial-by-internet-mother-inheritance-stolen-by-best-friend.html
Sub judice .........
Chinese Internet authorities have ordered websites—including a Chinese language environmental NGO site operated by China Development Brief (www.greengo.cn)—to remove an open letter from twelve organisations calling for a fair trial for jailed environmental activist, Wu Lihong
However, in April of this year Wu was arrested by local authorities in his home city of Yixing and has since been charged with blackmail. Prosecutors claim he “extorted 55,000 yuan from enterprises by threatening to expose how they were polluting the environment,” according to Xinhua.
On June 11 The China Daily reported that “China has sacked or otherwise punished five officials [from Yixing] for dereliction of duty” in connection with the lake’s pollution, and also referred to Wu’s arrest on “a charge some say was trumped up by vengeful officials.”
The now-suppressed open letter from environmental NGOs did not allege that the charge was “trumped-up.” Rather, it urged that “all the evidence should be examined carefully, the verdict should be reached independently by the court . . . and the court should not accept any evidence that was not lawfully obtained.”
First circulated on June 5, World Environment Day, the letter also called for the trial to be open to the public and the press, arguing that otherwise “the public will be led to conclude that the judicial process is being used to take revenge to a higher level
http://www.chinadevelopmentbrief.com/node/1157
In this respect, look at this open threads.
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/truecrimeweblog/5679895540739036095/
http://news.scotsman.com/ViewArticle.aspx?articleid=3308814
