High court rules that predators can face charges for online messages
By Globe Staff
The state Supreme Judicial Court ruled today that a person can be charged with enticing a minor simply by sending online messages.
Lawyers for a man appealing his conviction on a child enticement charge argued that he never engaged in anything more than “sending words” over the Internet. They argued that the law required the man to do something more, such as travel to an agreed rendezvous location.
Ruling in the case of Commonwealth v. Richard Disler, the SJC disagreed, saying that a person can be charged with enticement, if, with criminal intent, they “employ words, gestures, or other means” to induce a minor to enter or stay in a vehicle, building, or outdoor space.
“There is nothing in the language [of the law] that supports the defendant’s contention that, in addition, there must be an overt act in order for the crime of child enticement to occur,” the court said.
Disler was convicted after exchanging a series of instant messages with undercover police officers who were posing as a 14-year-old girl.
The court, in an opinion written by Justice Roderick Ireland, also rejected a variety of other arguments by Disler, including claims that the statute was too vague, that it violated free speech rights, that Disler's conviction should be thrown out because the girl he was corresponding with didn’t really exist, and that he was entrapped.
“We are pleased with the decision of the SJC. The Disler case shows that the statute in question is a very useful and important tool to fight online predators who would harm children,” Essex District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett said in a statement.
