Criminal Complaint Filed Against Facebook After Girl's Death 559
An anonymous reader writes "A prosecutor has opened an investigation into how Facebook allowed the publication of insults and bullying posts aimed at 14-year-old Carolina Picchio, who took her own life after a gang of boys circulated a video on Facebook of her appearing drunk and disheveled in a bathroom at a party. The Italian Parents Association has filed a criminal complaint against Facebook for allegedly having a role in the instigation of Carolina's suicide. 'This is the first time a parents' group has filed such a complaint against Facebook in Europe,' said Antonio Affinita, the director. 'Italian law forbids minors under 18 signing contracts, yet Facebook is effectively entering into a contract with minors regarding their privacy, without their parents knowing.''
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Insightful)
'Italian law forbids minors under 18 signing contracts, yet Facebook is effectively entering into a contract with minors regarding their privacy, without their parents knowing.''
how is facebook allowing this? did facebook buy the people internet connections? did facebook force her to sign up? did facebook force her to get hammered and act a fool?
Look, i understand all the facebook hate. and a lot of it is just, no question about that. but you cant blame facebook for any of this
Italians (Score:5, Insightful)
This from the same country that sued scientists for predicting earthquakes (or not predicting them good enough).
If the parents don't know about the "contract" that their children "sign" and this is a problem, then maybe the parents should be sued?
too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
that all the kids didnt have pocket sized HD video cameras when I was in school - the shit that went on would have been embarrassing for anyone reliving it later...but now, kids cant make mistakes and learn from them without being taunted fr life with the stupid mistake...
Of corse binge drinking and other crazy stuff that hapens at partys is wrong - hense the term mistake...Mistakes should be learning experiences, not stains that follow you around for life...
How can kids be kids with cameras everywhere?
Facebook isnt guilty here, just like guns don't kill people, its the kids that posted that shit that are to blame here...
Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to know. (Score:5, Insightful)
The Italian Parents Association has filed a criminal complaint against Facebook for allegedly having a role in the instigation of Carolina's suicide. ... 'Italian law forbids minors under 18 signing contracts...'
The biggest lie on the internet is the answer to the question "Are you 18 or older?"
Big deal. Almost every country is the same way. Only a parent's group would be as naive is to attempt this. And only a parent's group would try to shirk responsibility for parenting -- which is what this is really about. Look, if you can't educate your crotch fruit on how to safely use a computer, don't let them use one. Stop asking the damn government to do your job -- in the 50s, we could buy little Jimmy a chemistry kit that included Arsenic in it, or a glass blowing kit that was identical in every way to the tools used by adults, except they were made for children's hands.
In most societies that haven't yet gone full retard thanks to people propping children up as a shield for their own political gain, children start doing adult work as soon as they are physically and mentally capable. Run around in Africa and you'll see 7 year olds tending crops and making dinner. Meanwhile, in the United States, god help you if you forget to include the fork with your teenager's meal... they'll just stare blankly at it, or even complain.
I guess what I'm saying is: It's your parenting that's at fault, not the internet. No, really, it is, and I don't care what bullshit legal argument you care to make. If you have a crappy kid, it's very like to be a sign that you're a crappy parent. Deal with it, and stop ruining everyone else's lives with goverment regulation because you decided to breed but lacked the mental capacity to do any of the work that comes after your 15 seconds of joy.
Italian Prosecutor? (Score:4, Insightful)
Italian Prosecutor. Enough said.
By any chance is this the same Italian prosecutor that went after Amanda Knox?
The Italian legal system is a total joke. Facebook can just sit on this, nothing will happen for years.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
did facebook force her to sign up?
Irrelevant, since the crap wasn't posted on her account.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
did facebook force her to sign up? did facebook force her to get hammered and act a fool?
As far as I understand, the incident has nothing to do with her even having a FB account. The videographers who recorded her being drunk did have an account; but that has nothing to do with *their* privacy (such as of the account owner.)
In essence, FB is being sued for allowing someone else (the people who recorded the video) to post that video for everyone to see. That video was offensive to some other people. How would FB censors, even if FB had them, know what is and what isn't offensive?
In the end, it will be judged by the fact whether FB had a certain duty, and they failed at that duty. I suspect FB has no duty to watch users' videos. With regard to the contract, I am not sure if there was a contract. Most of the Web operates without an explicitly defined contract. It is hard to even establish competence over the Internet; and most services are free in every aspect. Can FB be guilty of giving access to a child? Depends on what that child said about his age. Most likely the EULA says "By clicking "Accept" I verify that I am of certain age and of legal age to form a contract." If the child did that, he misled the service provider and fraudulently obtained access to FB. The FB has no way to verify his age. It could be even impossible with EU's strict privacy laws.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
kids didnt have pocket sized HD video cameras when I was in school....but now, kids cant make mistakes and learn from them without being taunted fr life with the stupid mistake...
I don't know about that. In my experience kids have never required video evidence of a mistake being made before they're willing to taunt someone for life for making it. I'm sure that having embarrassing videos floating around doesn't improve the situation at all, but stuff like this happened long before cell phone cameras were prevalent. Blaming cell phones, or Facebook for that matter, is just an excuse to ignore the underlying systemic problem.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
i feel bad for the girl being bullied but i dont blame anyone for their death who kills themselves except for them
Fuck you and your ivory tower. Having been bullied to the point of considering suicide several times when I was a kid, I can tell you without a doubt, the bullies are accessories to the death. A human can only take so much abuse before they crack; juvenille minds even more so.
I have zero tolerence for bullies. They should be treated like criminals.
Re:Pot, meet Kettle (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only one that finds it hilarious that Americans - home of the most ludicrous legal system...
Really? I'd think North Korea would be at the top of the list at least, with at least a few others until we hit the USA... But hey, as long as we're throwing all perspective out the window, this is obviously the most ludicrous comment I've seen on Slashdot. Maybe I should sue you for defaming the US on the internet, hmmmm? After all, this comment could cause many innocent deaths from violent Americans who have been incensed by your comment. Someone needs to be held responsible. That's the ethical thing to do.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
I was not puking up drunk when I was 14. Neither were the other kids I hung out with. I don't consider that kind of behavior "kids be[ing] kids". At all.
However, I think this is more the fault of the parents than facebook. Facebook was not the negligent party that let that child get that drunk to begin with. You can yell all you want about kids sneaking around and getting away with stuff, but it's the parents' responsibility to mind the child nonetheless.
Bullying must stop (Score:4, Insightful)
This is undoubtedly singing the same tune that will most likely go on for decades to come but bullying must be brought to a end.
Parenting can only go so far - it's ridiculous to assume that telling your adolescent and hormonal child to be strong in the face of adversary will stop them from killing themselves. This poor girl left a note apologising for not being strong enough.
There's also no chance that one parent will lecture or attempt to teach another a child that bullying is wrong - that's, unfortunately, not their place. Of course, one parent could talk to another but that's only if they know.... which if often not the case.
However, there should be some figure of authority that should be able to do something...
If bullying is witnessed in the playground, a teacher would usually bring it to an end, and (hopefully) punish the bully - lecture them, make them sincerely apologise, etc. Although there's been ridiculous cases where teachers end up lecturing the bullied - that just infuriates me.
So, if this would occur in the schools and playgrounds, why not in the digital realm? It shouldn't be Facebook staff, in this case, but it should be the parents at the least. They really need to look after what their children are doing and what's happening to them. Facebook and other social media sites are just giant playgrounds for kids except there's no teachers around and that's always a recipe for disaster.
Of course, this should be all within reason - don't exactly want parents digitally stalking their kids 24/7 but it's not difficult to just check peoples walls every once in a while...
Anyway, that's enough ranting - hopefully that all makes sense.
Bullying is older than facebook. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet the US is adamant in it's right to enforce it's laws on internet presences that are not based in the US because they are used by US citizens. You can't have it both ways.
More importantly, just cause Facebook is based in the US doesn't mean that's the only law it has to worry about if it does business in other countries. You aren't going to allow foreign owned companies to ignore US laws while operating in the US.
The only way this comment would make any sense would be if Facebook specifically blocked anyone who wasn't a US citizen from using their service. They not only don't do that, they actively advertise and monetize in other countries.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. If someone publishes abusive remarks about you in a newspaper, it doesn't matter if you subscribe to the newspaper or not. You can still sue them, and depending on the jurisdiction you and the newspaper (or Facebook) are in, you might just even win.
The First Amendment stipulates that Congress may not pass laws that prohibit people from expressing their ideas or opinions. If you think the President is utterly wrong about something, you're free to say so, and you don't need to fear any persecution from the government. However, the First Amendment is not a license to say anything you want about anybody without consequences. If you write something false that defames the President's reputation, he can sue you for libel.
The First Amendment goes beyond words, as well. Actions such as protests or demonstrations can be considered speech, but the limits on actions are even harsher. Your free expression may not infringe on anybody else's rights. That means your protest can't block a business, harass someone, disrupt traffic, or damage property. You'll face legal consequences for all of those. If your "speech" is a threat (and you show sufficient capability and intent to follow through with that threat), the person you're threatening may even be able to legally kill you in self-defense.
The First Amendment is not a weapon that you can use to attack someone. It is a freedom that you can use to ensure your ideas are available to the world.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure others have had similar experiences which turned out to be to their benefit since they enabled them to learn that acting stupid has a nasty price a lot of the time. I've no comments about the second part of your argument though.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet the US is adamant in it's right to enforce it's laws on internet presences that are not based in the US because they are used by US citizens. You can't have it both ways.
I've seen commercial entities based in the US request via the USDOJ and other entities that other countries put pressure on internet presences not in the US in an attempt use US laws as a hammer.
I've seen the USDOJ and other entities become complicit in communicating the requests to other countries.
I've seen the governments and agencies thereof bend over for the US by complying with the request.
I've seen the internet presences bend over for their own government agencies.
But other than invading Nicaragua and kidnapping Manuel Noriega to put him on trial in the US, I haven't really seen the US enforcing US laws abroad. In fact, I've seen them keep GITMO open, despite campaign promises by three presidents, precisely so that they have a place controlled by the US military so they can store prisoners there and specifically NOT have to comply with US law.
The first two observations are the US' fault, at least in the general sense of "Blame the US for the actions of RIAA/MPAA/whoever, which is generally reviled by the average US citizen who cares one way or the other".
The last two observations are the fault of the target country and the internet presences in that target country having no backbones, and that's all on you.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:4, Insightful)
you dont believe in freedom of speech?
Not the OP, but I believe in Freedom of Speech. I also know that it doesn't, and shouldn't, mean that you can harass people.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
I was not puking up drunk when I was 14. Neither were the other kids I hung out with. I don't consider that kind of behavior "kids be[ing] kids". At all.
My, aren't we squeaky clean. Puking up drunk at 14, or any age, is not something to be encouraged, but it's a lot more forgivable than bullying or harassment.
Facebook was not the negligent party that let that child get that drunk to begin with. You can yell all you want about kids sneaking around and getting away with stuff, but it's the parents' responsibility to mind the child nonetheless.
This is a minor variant on "blame the victim": you're blaming the victim's parents. What about the parents of the scumbags that posted the video?
It matters. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know about the laws in Italy (and I am not a lawyer anywhere) but that doesn't really matter as far as I know in the US. Look at the story of Traci Lords. She used fake ID to make porn when she was 16 and there was, at least at the time, no way the other people making it could tell it was fake (it wasn't that hard to do back then). They were still at least charged. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traci_Lords#Porn_career [wikipedia.org]
All charges were dismissed against these men when it was revealed that the US Government had issued Traci Lords a US Passport indicating the false age under the name "Kristi Nussman". The US government had attested that she was above the age of consent at the time the films were made. This is somewhat similar to the Aaron Swartz case, at least in that government misconduct resulted in a crime.
The Traci Lords circus is a bad analogy for the case of the Italian girl, since, given that the girl could not legally enter into the license agreement with FB under Italian law, there was no contract. No contract = no case.
This is a case of grieving parents who are looking for someone to blame for their grief, and an Italian magistrate who is willing to be complicit in attempting to blame FB, nominally on behalf of the grieving parents, but probably with some political motivation. Politics in Italy are largely viewed by the rest of the world to be about grandstanding for publicity, and then riding the resulting wave into office. There have been many articles in US periodicals about this, the most (in)famous one being Ilona Staller's run for, and election to, parliament.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
If they try to hold Facebook liable, they've got an uphill battle.
Facebook has a well-documented history of working to block pre-teen minors from getting accounts, and also for requiring parental consent for teenage minors. They publish their stats, and last year's report was that about 38% of minor accounts were illegal. That is actually a really good number.
The girl was underage. She either filled out the forms properly and had parental consent *OR* she committed fraud and misrepresented her age or her parental consent.
That will play out thusly in court:
From the allegations: ''Italian law forbids minors under 18 signing contracts, yet Facebook is effectively entering into a contract with minors regarding their privacy, without their parents knowing.''
Facebook: We do everything we can to prevent children from committing fraud. Your daughter created an account on [datestamp]. The law required us to ask these questions, and we did. We sent the privacy forms to [email address] on [datestamp] and got a confirmation on [datestamp]. We met the standard required by law. You or your daughter committed fraud.
Court: The paper-trail meets the legal requirements. Dismissed.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:5, Insightful)
Firstly, I would have had my kid involved in extracurricular activities, had them assisting in chores and other things, and developed in them a sense of self-reliance and independence. A child that can do things for herself is not a child that can readily have their self-esteem destroyed by a bully.
Of course no child ever raised in such a manner by a self-righteous parent has ever been messed up, at least at some point in their life.
BTW, why do you write "I would have had my kid involved in extracurricular activities" and "I would parent my child" instead of "I did have had my kid involved in extracurricular activities" and "I did parent my child"? You have raised at least one child at least through their teens, right?
If the parents didn't step up to the plate, I would explain to them in a non-verbal way my disappointment in their lack of parenting.
Oh my, aren't we a tough character.
If I'm angry enough to fight someone, they're going to be facing me and they're going to be armed.
Armed? You mean like a duel in a Western? My favorites star Gary Cooper.
If it gets to the point of armed, I say screw the "fair fight" nonsense and just treat it like a war. The only object is to win. Of course I'm obviously not the sort of heroic character you are.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
This is more like people talking crap about you over a telephone rather than a newspaper. A newspaper has editors that have to read everything in it.
You don't sue the phone company for what people say on the phone.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess what I'm saying is: It's your parenting that's at fault, not the internet. No, really, it is, and I don't care what bullshit legal argument you care to make. If you have a crappy kid, it's very like to be a sign that you're a crappy parent. Deal with it, and stop ruining everyone else's lives with goverment regulation because you decided to breed but lacked the mental capacity to do any of the work that comes after your 15 seconds of joy.
What a terribly shallow view to have.
Day of scheduled suicide: February 8th 2013, my birthday [nydailynews.com]
Brocklebank said Noah's school gave her a bullying incident form to fill out, organized meetings between her son and his bullies, and asked the boys that were picking on him to sign contracts pledging to stop.
Still, she said, the harassment continued and she wanted authorities to do more. For example, Brocklebank said, Noah sat alone in the cafeteria for two months and often skipped lunch.
The situation came to a head when Noah, who only recently received his parents' permission to open an Instagram account, uploaded the pictures showing tiny cuts on his arm and a caption with his suicide threat on Jan. 26. He blocked his mother from seeing the post.
While her son was in the hospital on a psych hold,
she had this website created for him: http://lettersfornoah.com/about-noah.html [lettersfornoah.com]
I realize you're still a girl in training, but sooner or later you're going to have to learn that the world isn't so nearly as black and white as you've made it out to be.
Or maybe you'll write a letter to Noah and explain to him that his depression and isolation is all his parents' fault.
Your choice.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course no child ever raised in such a manner by a self-righteous parent has ever been messed up, at least at some point in their life.
If by "self-righteous" parenting you mean, parenting, then no. Not by the parent, anyway. Nothing in life is a guarantee, but if you're playing the odds, teaching a child to be self-reliant is going to result in a lot less bullying, and incidentally, may keep your 14 year old daughter from getting drunk at a party because you'll have raised her to be less suseptible to peer pressure as well; She'll trust her own judgements, not that of the "cool kids".
BTW, why do you write "I would have had my kid involved in extracurricular activities" and "I would parent my child" instead of "I did have had my kid involved in extracurricular activities" and "I did parent my child"? You have raised at least one child at least through their teens, right?
To answer that question, I'd suggest thinking about the statements you've quoted, rather than just frobbing the keyboard with a snarky comment and thinking it actually does something for you other than broadcast "I'm a giant asshole."
Oh my, aren't we a tough character.
A fair bit more than a troll on some internet forum, yes.
Of course I'm obviously not the sort of heroic character you are.
Obviously. A true hero of the internets would duel with facts, logic, and experience, not ad hominem, circular logic, and hand waves. Alas, you are unarmed.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
Get a grip. Freedom of speech does not cover harrasment, and was never intended to. It's supposed to be about freedom to express your political views without fear of repercussion from the government.
Taking videos of drunk teenagers and then posting it for all to see on the internet is a gross violation of privacy, verging on criminal harrasment. Whilst the bullies are not to blame for her death, they certainly contributed.
That said it's pretty much got nothing to do with Facebook and everything to do with the parents of all of the teenagers involved - the victim and the bullies. Why were they not monitoring their children's online behavior?
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:2, Insightful)
the Italian situation is still different. For the trespass case to be similar, you would have to have two people trespass on your property, get into a fight and then have the loser sue you for the injuries sustained during the fight.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:5, Insightful)
But you didn't answer that simple straightforward and completely reasonable question. You evaded it. Anybody who had raised at least one kid through their teen years, especially someone as self-righteous as you, would say "yes I have" and "yes I did raise my kid that way and they turned out great because of it". Ergo you haven't, and ergo your comments are a bombastic joke.
You're attacking the messenger, not the message. Whether or not I'm a parent has absolutely dick to do with whether or not my statements are correct. You may think it matters. Many people think it matters. But it doesn't; The truth is the truth, irrespective of who says it. And that, sir, is why the ad hominem is a logical fallacy, and why I didn't see a need to dignify yours with a direct response so you could sound your trumpet and say "See! See! This one isn't a parent yet, so we can safely ignore everything she said!"
You haven't attacked a single point I've made, nor even disagreed with it. All you're doing is hand waves and personal attacks... and the fact that even one person modded you up suggests that critical thinking skills here on Slashdot continue to fall precipitously and are being rapidly supplanted by feel-good but empty irrational discourse.
Speaking of critical thinking skills; here's some extra support for what I've been saying (and you haven't);
Zero tolerance policies are ineffective, most bullying isn't online but in real life, and bullying online often follows from the same, that the primary risk factor for bullying is being socially marginalized, and the correlation between bullying and suicide is tenuous at best. Source [csmonitor.com]
Zero tolerance policies were demanded by parents who wanted to address the symptom (bullying), not the problem (their child). Bullying can be greatly managed by teach the child to defend his/herself, something that teachers, administrators, and legislators are loathe to admit, but every psychologist will tell you is important. Confronting your attacker is therapudic, even after the fact -- it's where the phrase "getting your day in court" comes from. Anti-bullying strategies must be taught by the parents; For both political and social reasons, it cannot be done by the government. As far as being socially marginalized; While a parent cannot entirely prevent this, they can lend emotional support. As any member of the LGBT community will tell you, parental support makes dealing with coming out and social marginalization, isolation, etc., a great deal easier. Every advocacy group, every psychologist, every support group will tell you this. Parental involvement is the salve to the wound of bullying, not government intervention. It's supported in study after study that parental involvement and influence has an enormous bearing on a child's emotional and mental state. And speaking of that, the lack of correlation between suicide and bullying? That points to these teens already having significant mental illness. Well, where were the parents? It's not like depression isn't treatable.
Re:facebook is an american company (Score:5, Insightful)
No, neither of you did because you weren't pushed enough. This makes you luckier than others not superior, as you'd like to believe.
Everyone has a tipping point. All it takes is to destroy all of a person's hope.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
In the past, only the people present at the time of the incident know the facts, and all others had to go on was their say so. This allowed the relative importance of incidents to fade with time. With video footage of everything that proof persists indefinitely, and can be used to judge indefinitely.
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:4, Insightful)
Right, like victims never have shares in their own plight? Was she bullied? yes. Did she choose to kill herself? yes. Did the bullies kill her? no. Did facebook kill her? no. Who is responsible for her death? she is. Each side made choices along the way. Saying things that happen to make someone kill themselves is not the same thing as murdering them yourself.
blame the bullies' parents! blame their grandparents! blame zuckerberg!! I tire of this blame chain culture. Soon it'll be too risky to do much of anything in life, but of course, the politicians tell us that the top priority for western culture is to make the soccer moms feel that their kids are safe.
Bottom line: people do stupid shit. No amount of law or police state enforcement will change this. We should be teaching kids the tough realities of life instead of coddling their feelings. It prevents extreme reactions (like suicide or mass murder) to social stressors.
Re:Troll! In the dungeon! Thought you'd want to kn (Score:4, Insightful)
What a terribly shallow view to have.
Day of scheduled suicide: February 8th 2013, my birthday
Yes, let's just throw in some emotions to obfusciate the real question: Is filing a criminal complaint against Facebook the right reaction? The parents claim it is because they failed to prevent "cyberbullying". Unfortunately, there is absolutely no evidence [csmonitor.com] to support a link between suicide and bullying. As it so happens, suicide is the result of mental illness, and the DSM-V doesn't have anything listed for "recipient of mean words". Because it's a mental illness that's the cause here, specifically untreated depression, I'm going to have to turn that finger right back around at the parents. Well, what did you do when you noticed your daughter was depressed?
While her son was in the hospital on a psych hold,
she had this website created for him: http://lettersfornoah.com/about-noah.html [lettersfornoah.com]
Awwww, a completely unrelated but tragic tale to distract us from objectively thinking about this and instead give in to irrational emotional impulses. I'll stick with the scientific method, kthxbai.
I realize you're still a girl in training, but sooner or later you're going to have to learn that the world isn't so nearly as black and white as you've made it out to be.
An ad hominem attack. Stay classy, 'Tubesteak'. (-_-) With a nickname like that, you're hardly one to diss someone else's choice.
Or maybe you'll write a letter to Noah and explain to him that his depression and isolation is all his parents' fault.
To a significant degree... it is. [umm.edu] It has a strong genetic correlation; it runs in families. But let's ignore the science for a minute, that seems to be more in character with the NuSlash(tm) residents like yourself that have been filling this place up since it sold out to Dice...
Re:too many cams, kids cant be kids (Score:5, Insightful)
What you're describing isn't a 'systemic' problem...it's a HUMAN problem.
Essentially: People are dicks.
Kids are especially dicks, before they (hopefully) start to internalize the social-conduct rules that allow us to live in societies.
No matter how many wellness-meetings we hold, empowerment seminars we attend, etc. it won't matter. The fact is that humans are animals and there's ontological developmental stage where 'little animal humans' (hopefully) learn not to bite, hit, or poop on the floor. Shortly thereafter, there's an intellectual/social phase where we (hopefully, again) learn treat each other with a minimum of empathy and respect, usually through being treated like shit ourselves.
It's rough, and frankly, not all survive. Until we physiologically evolve to being sensitive humans coming out of the womb, it's not going to change. And as far as I've noticed, seclusion (ie home schooling during those formative years) simply stunts that development-track in one way or another.
Re:Italians (Score:5, Insightful)
Parents regardless. The girl was 14 and drunk at a party...
Good parenting there, folks. Yeah...Facebook failed the girl...not you, right?