I'm so much cooler online
 

I work down at the Pizza Pit
And I drive an old Hyundai
I still live with my mom and dad
I'm 5 foot 3 and overweight
I'm a scifi fanatic
A mild asthmatic
And I've never been to second base
But there's whole 'nother me
That you need to see
Go checkout MySpace

'Cause online I'm out in Hollywood
I'm 6 foot 5 and I look damn good
I drive a Maserati
I'm a black-belt in karate
And I love a good glass of wine
It turns girls on that I'm mysterious
I tell them I don't want nothing serious
'Cause even on a slow day
I could have a three way
Chat with two women at one time
I'm so much cooler online
So much cooler online

Well yea, until this happens:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080719/D920QGJG0.html

Scary stuff.
Some of the single Dwellars (with more luck than me) have posted about their private lives. Could that be used against them if they were raped?

I've written about the fact I often have violent dreams - could that be used to persuade a jury it was murder not manslaughter?

Or does it only count if it's under your real name because then it's boasting?
Hmmm - better review what I've written on Friends Reunited! Nah - I know I've kept it brief and to the point.

I don't want to be anonymous online. Getting to know people is part fo the point. But the most I feared was an ex or someone I really disliked stumbling across my posts here and posting something nasty. I have to think about this some more.

One positive is all the people in the article were drink drivers. Something I am perfectly safe from ;)

I think it is less about how personal you get and what you post or have posted that would support a notion of poor behavior after an event. That seemed like the common thread here. Not what you did before the event that got you into the court system. Say you killed someone drunk driving and got on your MySpace page and told your story and how sad you were, and that you were in rehab, and you published a letter to the family on your space, or a memorial to the victim, that would certainly give the judge a different set of information which to base sentencing guidelines. I would say these people lacked common sense, twice.

I agree that anything posted before hand might be damning, but anything post incident, certainly would influence a judge and/or jury, if it looked bad and was presented by the prosecution.

However, if I were a judge/juror, I would cast a jaundiced eye at Merc's scenario of, "how sad you were, and that you were in rehab, and you published a letter to the family on your space, or a memorial to the victim", if it were presented by the defense.

If you were a juror, you'd consider only what the judge allowed you to see!

But past behaviour is used in many courtrooms, including that of witnesses and victims. Is it such a big step that their blogs/ online comments might begin to make an appearance too?

I am comforted by the fact that at present it is simply an indicator of remorse (or lack of it) however.

For the record, if I made a stupid choice and it directly harmed another person my contrition would be real, no matter where I expressed it. I hope you wouldn't see me in a comedy prison uniform if I put a woman in hospital.

Past behavior is absolutely not allowed in US courts. You could have been arrested forty times previously - that has no merit during the next case. In fact, it is clearly inadmissible.

But if you've been convicted of crimes before (instead of just arrested,) I think that can be admitted as evidence, right? I think prior bad acts can also be presented during sentencing, once the jury is done deliberating.

In US rape cases, is the victim's past not examined and brought into play?

It's been controlled to an extent in the UK, but it used to be appalling. Questions could be asked about how many lovers a woman had had, how she behaved in bed, whether she was considered "easy" etc.

Laws have also changed in the other direction recently in that previous convictions can be referred to in court if they are of the same category. Although how far this stretches I am not sure.

past behavior can be introduced if the defendant acts as a witness in the trial. It can be used to argue for / against the integrity of the witness. That's why you frequently don't see defendants testify in their own defense; they have previous actions that they do not want admitted into the record.