Anti-Asian E-Mail Called ‘Classic’ Prank

A flame or not a flame?

That was the critical question Wednesday in the groundbreaking trial of an electronic-mail sender accused of violating the civil rights of some UC Irvine students logged on to a campus computer network.

Prosecutors are contending that the message from the sender, former UCI student Richard Machado, constituted a threat because he vowed to hunt down and kill Asian students at the university.

But Wednesday, an expert in Internet etiquette described the e-mail as “a classic flame,” on-line lingo for an angry message that--while annoying--is not harmful.

“It is definitely a flame,” said Sara B. Kiesler, a professor of social sciences at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. “Because this [threat] is so outrageous and [it] sounds very childish. . .”

Any reasonable person using the Internet “understands these are words flowing around, and it’s a different world,” said Kiesler, who has written two books and numerous scholarly articles on the behavior of computer users on the Internet.

Kiesler was called to testify by Deputy Federal Public Defender Sylvia Torres-Guillen, who is contending that her client was a despondent and bored teenager who simply committed “a stupid prank” to provoke a response from the 59 recipients of the message.

The message, signed by “Asian Hater,” warned that all Asians should leave UC Irvine, otherwise the sender vowed to hunt them down and kill them.

“I personally will make it my [life’s work] to find and kill everyone of you personally. OK? That’s how determined I am. Do you hear me?” the message read.

Kiesler gave the jury of three women and nine men a crash course on the culture of the Internet, lecturing them about flames, newbies--as new users of the Internet are called--and trolls, people who send inflammatory e-mail just to elicit angry responses from others.

Kiesler testified that some computer users flame others because they enjoy the anonymity.

“People say things without meaning what they say,” Kiesler said.

At her university, Kiesler said, administrators have set up computer sites where students could flame their roommates, their parents, their landlords, and another site where they could “flame in general.”

Kiesler said she has never encountered a situation in which someone made good on a threat sent via the Internet

Under cross-examination, Assistant U.S. Atty. Mavis Lee contended the criminal statutes make it illegal to threaten people.

“If underlying conduct is criminal in the real world, it is still criminal in cyberspace,” Lee said, eliciting an affirmative response from Kiesler.

Assistant UCI Police Chief Dennis Powers testified Wednesday that Machado told him he sent the e-mail because he “wanted to shake [Asian students] up and scare them.” Another UCI officer testified that Machado said he meant no harm and that he merely wanted to provoke a response.

Earlier, U.S. District Judge Alicemarie H. Stotler ruled that the defense could present evidence that Machado apologized to leaders of Asian students about a month after he sent the upsetting e-mail.

The judge also said she would consider Torres-Guillen’s unusual request to expand on her opening statement to the jury.

Guillen-Torres said she needed to tell the jury that critical information turned over by prosecutors only after the trial began revealed that the majority of e-mail recipients thought Machado’s message was a bad joke.