Lori Drew Indicted in death of Megan Meier

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by VideoFreek, May 15, 2008.

  1. VideoFreek macrumors 6502

    VideoFreek

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
  2. Sideonecincy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2003
    #2
    Just an FYI to everybody who hasn't taken any time to actually get some of the background on this case:

    1) The families had been somewhat close before this happened. Lori Drew knew that Megan had issues with depression.

    2) Megan's depression was not untreated. She had been diagnosed at a much younger age and was on medication, which Lori Drew also knew. Megan was also enrolled in a different school as part of her treatment, and indications were that it was a good step.

    3) Megan was not actively depressed prior to the flame war that arose that morning. She had been handing out invitations to her 14th birthday party. She has also invited "Josh" to attend the party. It was an unpleasant comment in response to that invitation that was the first spark.

    The basic facts are that a grown woman and mother overreacted to a complaint by her 13-year-old daughter about a former friend no longer hanging out with her. That woman then hatched an elaborate plot to create a MySpace account so that they could make certain that the other girl wasn't saying bad things about her daughter.

    That woman, with the aid of her daughter and an 18-year-old employee, then made a concerted effort to gain the confidence of the other girl. A fourth conspirator, yet another 13-year-old girl was added, and I suspect that that girl was the one who most likely was most involved in humiliating Megan.

    Drew originally gave a statement that she "monitored" the joint MySpace account, and thus she should have put a stop to things when things started becoming abusive, but she did not. Even though she was well aware that Megan was mentally unstable. That could very likely be successfully argued as a case of criminal negligence.

    I've been reading about this during work a little too much. This is one of the only times I've seen recently that a EULA is being enforced properly. I have a myspace account that I check every so often out of boredom. I am glad I never really frequented the site on a regular basis. For once the media pressure, an abusive EULA, and overprotective cyber-laws for minors seem to be going to do some good.

    I hope she enjoys her 20 years in prison.
     
  3. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #3
    A sad, case, but as Wired points out, this could be setting a scary precedent.

    The state couldn't prosecute the case because what was done wasn't illegal. The feds stepped in and the best evidence they could find is that she's violating the MySpace terms of service. Jail time for violating a web site's policy? That means anyone who hacks their iPhone, for example, could end up serving hard time.

    Yeah, *this* woman probably deserves it, but the precedent set by this case would be terrible.
     
  4. LeahM macrumors 6502a

    LeahM

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
  5. iBlue macrumors Core

    iBlue

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, England
    #5
    That's true but I also sort of appreciate part of that precedent - that there's some accountability over what you do on the internet. The laws should be a bit less ambiguous in order to protect people who are occasionally victimized in some form or another on the net. I get your point though, just sayin' like.
     
  6. Sdashiki macrumors 68040

    Sdashiki

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Location:
    Behind the lens
    #6
    But I dont think the EULA has anything to do with the case other than its proof they are not supposed to be using myspace to harass. She is not being indicted for breaking the EULA. Thats civil not criminal right?

    And yet:

    So i have no clue.
     
  7. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #7
    Well, at least now if she's at a loss for something to do, the prison warden can make some worthwhile suggestions. :D
     
  8. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #8
    According to the article...

    Infliction of emotional distress / conspiracy to inflict emotional distress seems to be the charge. But I can only find references online to tort law relating to infliction of emotional distress, as you say, and not criminal law.

    Can anyone explain what the standards are for this charge? It would seem that such a charge would involve some way of demonstrating intent to cause emotional harm. E.G. differentiating this from some random pissing contest that happened on the internet. If so, perhaps the reason for the change in stance suddenly is that evidence was uncovered which can demonstrate this intent. But then one never knows.

    And out of curiosity, based on the logic of the case, how is this mother guilty of this crime and that individual who posed as an underage boy soliciting sex leading to the politician in ... wherever it was (this story: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/11/7/104619/691 )... how does that not essentially meet the same set of criteria? (Legally, that is... so unless the legal basis is specific to the minor victim, I don't see how "He was a pedophile and she was just a kid" would be an explanation).
     
  9. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #9
    Let this be a message to parents who stop being parents and start trying to be their kids friends.
     
  10. roisin and mac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    #10
    It rather appears they did, on the whole--they are supposed to have been the only ones in possession of the password for the account; one of the parents would login, then the daughter would use it with them in the room, and log out before they left. And this system did seem to work, because for the few weeks (I think) the poor kid had the account prior to the day she killed herself, it was a source of joy and fun to her, not distress. The distress just started on that day, and it was unfotunate that her mother never got a chance to realise what bad news this was, what with having to take the other kid to the dentist's or whatever it was, and seems to have broken her own rule of leaving Megan alone while logged on. It's too bad really, 'cause it looks like it only happened the once, and it had to be the cr@p timing of being the same day that harpy (L. Drew) decided to cash in her chips.

    As for the not going after her part, well, let's just say I reckon this mother's gonna have a lot of things to confront in her own role in this entire thing (parents of suicides go through that anyway even with far older kids). I'm not sure how much I can expand on this without getting somebody upset, but I'll just say it does give me pause when I hear that a lassie of just 13 has a history of depression and is being medicated, with no mention (that I found) of any clearly identifiable traumatic incident such as a terrible accident, childhood abuse, the death or life-threatening illness of a loved one, as the start or trigger of this depression. you can't underestimate the influence your home has at those sorts of ages, really. Even though I don't want to, I can't help but ask myself some questions about the kind of parenting and nurturing (I know that's not the right expression, but it's all I can come up with now :p) that Megan had. I also find it...interesting...that the mother really became sooo upset when she saw the messages--because of Megan using rude language to respond to the things posted about her, for which the general consensus seems to be that they were really quite, quite nasty--unbearable provocation really.

    you sound rather older than this lot, so you could probably use them and have fun just fine without any trouble :) First of all there seems to be much less BS of the kind between older participants, and second, someone older and with a lot more experience is much better at recognising when someone is likely to start giving them grief, as well as at taking steps to avoid the grief or the person. That can't be underestimated, I think, and neither can the fact that on the whole, your threshold for taking aggro is much higher. Getting called lame or puh-thetic or whatever the word is for not being popular when you're 13 is hell, getting told that when you're even just 23, usualy by that time you don't give a rodent's rear tbh ;)

    As for your IRC times, I don't know if things were different overall, in the sense of all of society being a bit more civilised. I'm not so sure, because nasty, destructive behavior seems rather a mainstay in human relationships :D. However, 11 years ago it was nowhere near as easy or as cheap to get online as it is today (far fewer people could easily do it for many hours), which may well have meant the overall tone of online communities was possibly rather higher (on average) than it would be today, where basically everyone in most western societies can get online, and so you have a much more representative cross section of the various kinds of people you come across in society in general. For instance you wouldn't get helicopter moms (been dying to use this phrase, lol) messing about on IRC 11 years ago, but now they're on myspace *shrug*.


    Anyways, I hope this drew woman rots in hell :p. I see where people are coming from about the precedent, and it would be sad if this case were used like that, but this woman needs to be whisked out of society, 'cause what she did once, she can do again--especially if she feels emboldened by having gotten away with it.
     
  11. velocityg4 macrumors 68040

    velocityg4

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    #11
    I can see the mother being held liable in civil court and having to pay out on a lawsuit for emotional damages. But I do not see any crime. The mother did not kill this girl nor did she conspire to have her killed.

    The teenager committed suicide plain and simple. Whether it was from emotional duress or not she had the choice. She was not forced to kill herself. Though preying on her depression was mean, I still have very little pity for that girl since she threw out the most important thing she has.

    edit: By being forced to kill herself I mean. Giving her life to save the life of others, to kill herself to avoid physical torture that would ultimately lead to her death or to avoid capture and torture that would lead to the releasing of State or Military secrets.
     
  12. megfilmworks macrumors 68020

    megfilmworks

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Location:
    Sherman Oaks
    #12
    Adults must be held accountable for their actions. What a waste of life.
    This mother dug her own grave. I hope she gets the maximum penalty.
     
  13. FreeThought macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #13
    Lori Drew goes on trial

    Steve Pokin of the Suburban Journals is the reporter that first broke the story last year. Steve is now in Los Angeles covering the trial of Lori Drew and here is a link to the full year's worth of coverage including the latest reports from LA: http://suburbanjournals.stltoday.com/home/special_feature
     
  14. RayStar macrumors member

    RayStar

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    #14
    FreeThought thanks for the info on this case. I believe it will not go well for Drew.
     

Share This Page