Stymie said:

Ivy, I can honestly say that I haven't dealt with any serious cases of mental illness but please understand that I'm not trivializing that this girl had issues, whatsoever...

my concern is that this woman isn't charged with anything overly criminal in the idictment...like somebody mentioned earlier, it seems like an indictment to please the masses...it's been done before and it will be done again...but to use the law to create a shaky case for an already shaky "crime", well, it's perversion of the law at it's finest...

I sense the introduction of "Meagans Law" coming before lawmakers soon...I'm not sure if that will be good or bad...I'm all for the protection of others, but that protection need not be an all encompassing blanket that can be twisted every time somebody is the victim of a sick joke, prank or verbal attack...

I think it was obvious harrassment, stalking, an adult preying on a child, etc - all kinds of wrong.

Muse2NOPharaoh said:

roodboi said:

Honestly, I don't think it's appeasing the masses. Most people don't care about this just as most people don't care about most stuff. If the mother who did this knew the girl was mentally ill, I think provoking her is a crime. Trying to hide what was done: a crime. For her being as old as she was and playing these childish types of games, she at least needs a foot in her ass.

Civil court probably would be the best thing that could happen.

roodboi said:

Well stated.

Stymie said:

she needs about 30 foots in her ass and a few to the teeth...

(yes, I know it should be feet)

roodboi said:

My family is from Memphis TN. I know all about foots.

roodboi said:

Based on the general spirit of the indictment, some of the alters around here better be careful not to hurt anyone's feelings. The feds might come knocking on your door.

People are mean live and learn

Pochacco said:

Yep, people in general suck.

Stymie said:

I can see his point as well, but I still accept this case plainly as an adult stalking a child online.

She is an adult who created a fraudulent account with intent to stalk and intimidate a child for ill purposes.

If it would not have been Megan, then who else's children woud she prey upon simply because her ego dictated it at the drop of a hat, from one day to another?

I'm stll down for letting the bitch rot in jail. Again, since she thinks it's such big kicks to role play as a teenage boy with abusive tendencies towards other kids, I say let her do it til her heart's content, however- with somebody just as big and bad she is... in the comfort of a CORRECTIONAL FACILITY.



.

Stymie said:

Especially some bosses; they suck the worst!

Ottensen said:

It's probably not the first time she's done it either. We let so much bullying and harassing slide in this society.

Ottensen said:

That's how I look at it as well. I think she falls into the online child predator category.

JustErin said:

Word.

PANDURITO said:

It shouldn't have been facilitated by a grown woman who is a mother herself.

matt said:

Yeah, she isn't even being charged for the crime she deserves to be charged for

Ottensen said:

That's exactly what I was going to say. this is not trivial.

roodboi said:

Don't you think this goes way beyond simply hurting feelings? This was a campaign against this girl by an adult and how is that not stalking? It's way beyond the level of just hurting feelings. This woman was out to destroy this girl and she did a good job of it.

violator said:

Sorry, but I disagree. The law is still waaaay behind the curve on how to regulate the internet and what laws apply to our "online actions". Considering the amount of premeditation that went into her seduction of this girl via MySpace that type of behavior should be ruled criminal. She was a 49 year old woman for god's sake!!! FORTY NINE!!! She "courted" a frikkin' 13 year old girl!!! That's just plain sick and the FACT that the girl hanged herself after the "courtship" ended is what makes this vile and sinister and just plain evil.

If it were up to me she would be sent to rot on Devil's Island, French Guyana. End of story.

I don't even see why this is an "internet" case other than the means of contact. Why can't it be plain old "fraud" or "harrassment", etc?

Back to the old books of justice I say.

RenHoek said:

What are we disagreeing on? You admit the law is still behind technology, which I agree. So do we start manufacturing indictments to appease the public? Understand that you and I are not debating the merits of what Lori Drew did. It was dispicable. But it seems that what she did was not criminal at all. If the law needs to catch up, then let it do just that. The answer, from where I sit, wouldn't be to issue symbolic indictments that if lead to a conviction would almost certainly be overturned on appeal.

Nobody cares about flimsy indictments or the 'slippery slope' until they find themselves on it. It most certainly rolls both ways.
[Edited 5/16/08 12:29pm]

violator said:

Well said Violator. I understand where you're coming from on a factual level. I just hate to see a murderer get away with it. Seen too many of those in my lifetime and I think it's hella weak when crime goes unpunished thanks to a "technicality".

Ottensen said:

it is our job to educate our kids - our school has already started with internet safety as part of the curriculum

PANDURITO said:

sterling argument.

let's give the lady a medal.

Stymie said:

you know, there may be valid legal loopholes and inconsistencies that point in the favor of this woman, but the clear moral injustice still applies:

this was a grown-ass woman who knew exactly what she was doing when she was fucking with her neighbor's teenaged daughter on the internet.

PER.I.OD.

if there's not a law against that, fine. if her reputation is ruined, that's a nice start. believe me, i hate gross displays of moral indignation because nobody among us is a saint, but for christ's sake. this was beyond the pale.

burn the witch!

Anxiety said:

Do you?
You must have had a real bad time reading this thread

Anxiety said:

PANDURITO said:

actually, it was difficult to read, because it takes a lot for me to side with nancy grace-ish moral superiority, but this time i think it's absolutely warranted. i can't see why this woman should be cut a break. legal loopholes? fine. work through them. but this woman still has a lot to answer for. we can talk about the cruel facts of life all the live long day, but this woman knowingly and purposefully manipulated a child's emotions. that is FUCKED.

I have a solution, shut that fuckin' MySpace site down for once and for all. Sure other sites will emerge to mimic it (we already have Facebook and BlackPlanet), but still I think MySpace is the worse. Most people use that shit like its a damn escort service while others use to connect with people from the past who have moved away (old high school classmates, college mates, previous co-workers, etc.)...but I just think that MySpace is getting way out of hand.

Yes this is a sad case, and more so because a childish adult was in charge of humiliating an emotional unstable 16 year old girl (who probably shouldn't had no business on the site, i'm not placing any blame on her for her death) all for nothing. Even if this was a sick joke involving a real teeange boy, it would still be sick. People can be so cruel its sad.

My take on this is that you can't blame others for your own reactions. What if a stranger, acquaintance or close friend even tells me I'm ugly and I can't cope with it and go and kill myself? Can you blame him/her? Or a partner telling me he/she wants to break up and I go and jump out of the window in response? Can I blame him/her for my suicide? Or a kid who gets bad grades at school and is devastated and go and hang himself/herself - can you blame the teacher who gave the low grades, or the whole school?

This girl, depressed or not, was going to come across a thousand 'predators' in this life, some more real and more vicious/dangerous than others. The point - and what her parents ought to have taught her - is to learn how to deal with these things, as well as to be more discerning when it comes to the people she meets online and off-.