LOGOS
In The New York Times article “Bullying, Suicide, Punishment,” Professor of Law and cybercrime specialist, Orin S. Kerr, expresses his view that offenders need to be prosecuted for the crime they committed and not for how their victim responded, releasing the cyberbully of any ownership of what occurs after the offense. In this line of thinking, should the courts also be expected to stop charging robbers with first-degree murder after they “accidentally” murder their victim while committing their initial felony? No, because whether it was their intention or not, the act was a result of their crime, for which they should be punished to the full extent.
ETHOS
California State Representative Linda Sanchez is quoted saying, “[W]e have laws criminalizing stalking, sexual harassment, identity theft and more when it takes place in person and online. All of these actions have consequences. But there is one serious online offense that has no penalty—cyberbullying” (“Prosecuting”).
PATHOS
Those who oppose legal ramifications for cyberbullying suggest that the bully’s actions are protected under his first amendment right to free speech and he should not be held accountable for how the victim chooses to respond. Tyler’s mother, Jane Clementi, would disagree. She blames her son’s death on the violation he faced at the hands of his roommate.