I witnessed "cyber bullying" on BBS forums already in the mid-to-late 1980s. It's both understandable and curious that very few contemporary journalists have any idea at all about that pre-Internet multiverse.
Not too surprising given the demographics of BBS users of the era. Wonder how it would compare to the amount of bullying those same users dished out and received in physical space during the same period.
That comes down to intent. Did they realise the threats would be seen as being by Lunney, and make them with the intent that he would be falsely accused? Or were they merely exploiting a fake name and not expecting backlash on the real Lunney? We don't know.
Why didn't they just file a Doe lawsuit against the person who actually wrote the emails and get a court order taking everything down? That would likely have worked instead of the approach they did take. I haven't read the case so there might be more details I'm missing.
Lunney(the real one), was target of identity theft, but not victim of the harassment directly (besides being accused it was him)
The author of the article seems just made a clickbait title with the recent bullying in the news.
Article has nothing to do with bullying