Just for kicks I looked up the definition online and did a screenshot of it.
If you can read the bottom lines it states:
“children may be reluctant to admit to being victims of cyberbullying”
I can understand the reluctance. We know that many kids and adults will silently suffer and unfortunately we don’t find out until it is too late that they have been hit with the most lethal cyber-bullets and are barely holding on emotionally.
What I am having a problem understanding is if you have posted something that is malicious and intentional, such as “Drink bleach and die…No one likes you”, to another person, how can believe you have done nothing wrong?
When Savannah Guthrie asked her if she felt she did anything wrong, this 13 year-old girl, with absolutely no remorse, said “No, I do not feel l did anything wrong.’’
In my opinion, Savannah’s facial expression was a bit taken back.
Being cleared of cyberbullying charges doesn’t mean you didn’t do anything wrong morally and ethically.
I believe those posts speak for themselves, however in the eyes of the law, these girls were legally cleared.
Could she be that naive to believe that posting mean comments and being part of a cyber-mob of girls ganging up on Rebecca Sedwick is acceptable?
Do we look at the parents?
Yes. They are relieved the charges are dropped, and I would be too, but I would also be diligently working on being a spokesperson for victims of bullies and cyberbullies as well as insisting my daughter be involved 110%.
When this case first came to our attention, I believed in rehabilitation. Even though there are no charges, we can’t deny what is in black and white (or whatever colors your screens are in). Those words are cyber-bullets. In my opinion they were were typed with an intent. If you want to make excuses – go ahead – you are only hurting the girls typing them. For they will never seek the help they desperately need without understanding what they did wrong.