Thank you for supporting Sammy.

Okay I read this whole thing and heres what I think If someone was just pretending to post as Sarah then wouldn't they do it more? It doesnt seem like they would write this little bit here and here and not try to make it better or more convincing or have point to it. all the other evidence plus that makes it seem like more like than not, by now it's her.

Some of them were written before the crime. Unless someone has been planning to imitate her since before the murders, we can assume that she wrote them. For example her LiveJournal postings. In one case I know the owners of the site where Sarah posted from an account that has a long history there.

In other cases, while we can't completely verify the authorship, the texts were produced by whomever controls Sarah's MySpace account. I am assuming that is still her, but I won't know for sure until I hear back from my friend in MySpace security after the weekend.

PS while I am on the subject...whomever went to the library to send the fraudulent email, you might want to consider that accessing someone's email account without their permission is a crime. This is how Sarah Palin's email was accessed during the election and that kid ended up in a world of shit.

You have been reported. Libraries generally require that users identify themselves in order to access their computers and they have video surveillance. Was the few hours of laughs worth it? I hope so, because you are headed for some unpleasantness.

??? Are you really talking to ME? or are you talking to that clauidi person? wtf????????????

I am NOT talking to you.

Unless of course you are really the person from the RLC that told me they lived in the South Bay Area. Oops.

Oh allright. well you said "you". Hell, I thought you thought I was Sarah Palin for a minute.

OK you lost me completely now.

since were both on here together right now, can you stop saying you when youre not talking to me?

I think you know exactly what I am talking about Crow. You appear whenever I talk about Fake Sarah and fly away when I don't. One of the people involved in this little fiasco went to a library and sent email from an illegally accessed email account. Too bad that person told me about living in the area before making the worst mistake of their lives.

I also note that birds of a feather flock together.

Identity theft is bad.

omg this again? Now you (dangersmind) think I know when you're here and come in here then? do you guys think everybody is somebody else or that you already know who everybody on the net is?????????????

i thought this was over when the owner (paximus) said he was done questioning me and i could just post about the case
no?????

It also can be illegal depending on what state you are in and what you do. See this story from last year: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

There is of course also the infamous Lori Drew/MySpace Suicide Case.

The State of Texas recently passed the following law:

H.B. No. 2003
AN ACT
relating to the creation of the offense of online harassment.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 33, Penal Code, is amended by adding
Section 33.07 to read as follows:
Sec. 33.07. ONLINE HARASSMENT. (a) A person commits an
offense if the person uses the name or persona of another person to
create a web page on or to post one or more messages on a commercial
social networking site :
(1) without obtaining the other person’s consent; and
(2) with the intent to harm, defraud, intimidate, or
threaten any person.
(b) A person commits an offense if the person sends an
electronic mail, instant message, text message, or similar
communication that references a name, domain address, phone number,
or other item of identifying information belonging to any person:
(1) without obtaining the other person’s consent;
(2) with the intent to cause a recipient of the
communication to reasonably believe that the other person
authorized or transmitted the communication; and
(3) with the intent to harm or defraud any person.
(c) An offense under Subsection (a) is a felony of the third
degree. An offense under Subsection (b) is a Class A misdemeanor,
except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the actor
commits the offense with the intent to solicit a response by
emergency personnel.
(d) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this
section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor
may be prosecuted under this section, the other law, or both.
(e) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that
the actor is any of the following entities or that the actor’s
conduct consisted solely of action taken as an employee of any of
the following entities:
(1) a commercial social networking site ;
(2) an Internet service provider;
(3) an interactive computer service, as defined by 47
U.S.C. Section 230;
(4) a telecommunications provider, as defined by
Section 51.002, Utilities Code; or
(5) a video service provider or cable service
provider, as defined by Section 66.002, Utilities Code.
(f) In this section:
(1) ” Commercial social networking site ” means any
business, organization, or other similar entity operating a website
that permits persons to become registered users for the purpose of
establishing personal relationships with other users through
direct or real-time communication with other users or the creation
of web pages or profiles available to the public or to other users.
The term does not include an electronic mail program or a message
board program.
(2) “Identifying information” has the meaning
assigned by Section 32.51.
SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

From: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Ha! well send the police here and i'll put some pants on. i'm sure they care what i'm doing on a sunday afternoon on a internet board.

And I am not in Texas and I never said I was.

This is stupid. I think Im just gonna not talk to YOU. Youre fuckin nuts.

I know a guy who did six months.

Is this a joke? what are you fuckers talking about?? well its a awful long fucking runing joke if you ask m,e. can we get off me? i am not the type that calls in the owner but this is getting in the way of anything.

Crow wrote:Is this a joke? what are you fuckers talking about?? well its a awful long fucking runing joke if you ask m,e. can we get off me? i am not the type that calls in the owner but this is getting in the way of anything.

I'm not talking to you.

maybe quit calling everybody 'you' then. or quote.

The guy with the Lori Drew suicide case is sure talking to me. he at least uses my name./ he says he wasn't but then he suses my name so whats that mean????????????

Lets not let this all become a pissing match. I support that DM wants to
verify and be sure this is the real Sarah. Whether he is right or not
doesnt matter to me, its a situation where HE DOESNT WANT TO BE RIGHT,
in fact, we all hope IT IS HER, but I appreciate he wants to be sure.

That said, lets not attack eachother personally. I do not know who Crow
is, I tried to find out, they dont want to show their hand and thats ok
with me, AS LONG AS CROW POSTS ABOUT THE CASE they are welcome here, if
Crow decides to get personal then by all means defend yourself but let
Heroine know and she will handle it. Aside from that, have fun and
debate all youd like. Just dont make it personal.

Andres, you might be interested to know that that New York, Nevada, and Tennessee all have passed similar laws to Texas. Depending, six months might be considered a light sentence.

The Texas law criminalizes the unauthorized transmission of an electronic communication (e.g., e-mail, text message, or instant message) using another person’s identifying information (e.g., name, domain address, phone number, etc.) with the intent of causing (a) the recipient to believe the sender was the other person, and (b) harm to any person. This offense is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year of imprisonment and a fine not to exceed $10,000. Beyond that, if someone impersonates another person with intent to defraud, harm, intimidate or threaten another person, the charge can be increased to a third-degree felony, which is punishable by two to ten years imprisonment and a fine not to exceed $10,000.

Good post. I come in and talk about whether its sarah posting and they (or he at least) astarts saying its ME thats Sarah.



and I dont "fly away" either. i'm watching House too. does he only do one thing when hes on the internet??????



on edit I posted this before he posted that legal one. i was talking about your post Paximus.

Fair enough Pax. I'll shut up about this for now. Let the Crow(s) fly free...

The biggest irony here for me is that if it weren't for these Fake Sarah postings no one here would be talking about Sarah McCroskey at all right now. While the family history is somewhat relevant to the case, obviously Sarah had and likely still has very little knowledge of what actually happened in Farmville back in September. The continued existence of these false postings is accomplishing exactly the opposite of what Fake Sarah says she wants in the very first WS posting, drawing further attention to Sarah and her online presence. And I imagine the impending legal shit storm resulting from impersonating her will just draw further unwanted attention to her life.

Sad.

[quote="Crow"]Good post. I come in and talk about whether its sarah posting and they (or he at least) astarts saying its ME thats Sarah.



and I dont "fly away" either. i'm watching House too. does he only do one thing when hes on the internet??????

No one is saying you, Crow, is Sarah. To begin to read into the ' you ' as you personally, then there's a problem. There is not a personal attack to you as the person as you Crow. The topic is referring in general to whomever the 'you' is. We say that word all the time in our common speaking as a referance to whomever it applies to.
It's like saying to a classroom of students aloud that somebody left the computers on all night and alot of them say it was not them and get all bent out of shape about it, even though the teacher did not name any personal names. the 'somebody' knows who they are whether they come forward or not.
This is rather silly and takes away from what is going on here as to whether sarathizzle is the legit sister of sam or an imposter or someone speaking for her. imo

Well said. Lets focus on the issue and not eachother. Verifying that this is the real Sarah is ok, and the investigation should continue, lets just be careful not to accuse anyone until we know for sure it is them, we have a good group here and I just dont want it tore apart. We have a lot of fun here so lets protect what we have and I know DM is doing exactly that, as he said before, rightly, this sort of shit has no place in adult discussion.