Incorrect. This woman’s daughter was a childhood best friend of Megan. Megan took vacations with the Drews. They knew she had self esteem issues, battled severe depression, had been suicidal in the past, and that she was taking medicine. Yet, the “adult” woman still chose to masquerade as a cute teenage boy, to harass and cause mental distress to a thirteen year old girl. Twenty years is the least time she should do, IMO.
For breaking what law?
From the second link in the OP. (bolding mine)
Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.
Fair enough. IANAL but I think the only way she can be convicted of the conspiracy charge is if she is convicted of at least one of the other charges, which I cannot conceive happening. Then again, a grand jury indicted her, so anything is possible. I’d like to get a doper lawyer’s opinion on all of this if one happens to swing by.
Well, you could say the same of Megan’s mom but Megan was still left unattended at the computer (which her mom supposedly so closely monitored; how she does that from the orthodontist’s office I’ll never know) even though her mother knew at the time that Megan was in a potentially upsetting situation. Then, as if it weren’t bad enough being harassed by somebody she’d grown to trust, Megan was yelled at by her mother, who was “so furious”, first from the dentist’s office and then again when her mother got home after which Megan was left completely alone. According to her dad he at least attempted to comfort her on the stairs but if that quote is at all accurate (which I doubt), he did a shitty job. Seriously, “it’s okay”? No, it’s like the end of the world for a girl that age.
Did her parents kill her? No, of course not, but her mom never should have let her log on in the first place if she was so “pressed for time” or she should have made Megan log off before she left. And then to yell at her for not listening? You have to be some kind of a retard to expect a distressed 14 year old girl, especially one who has some degree of emotional problems anyway, to simply walk away from that kind of drama. Also, if Megan’s emotional stability was so questionable even before this incident, it should have occurred to her parents that leaving her alone for so long would not be the best thing (not necessarily because it was obvious that she would kill herself; more like “My kid is obviously hurting. Perhaps she could use some bit of support now.”)
Of course, none of this negates the fact that Lori Drew is a bad person. I’m just shocked that nobody has said anything regarding the behavior of Megan’s parents (especially her mom).
Which would be an asshole thing for another 13 y/o to do. For an adult to do it…I think Lori needs her head checked.
Just a wild assed guess, but you aren’t the parent of several children are you? Or the parent of a teen aged girl. 
There are times when children do what they are told the first time. Other times they do it the second time. Other times they do it the 478th time you tell them. In my experience there is no way to tell in advance which it will be.
Also when you have more than one child there are times you really wish cloning was a viable technology as you really need to be in two places at once.
Is today’s emergency serious and the mother should blow off the medical appointment, or is it just another run of the mill worst thing ever? It is very hard to tell at the time, but hindsight is always 20-20.
Speaking as a former parent of two teenagers, I can’t fault the mother at all in this.
How is the view from up on that horse?
So you do it for them. If I had to tell my kid 17 times to put his shoes on because we’re going to go the park, that’s one thing. If it was important and I needed his shoes on right now, I’d just do it for him. If it was important enough to be FURIOUS about it after the fact, maybe Megan’s mom should have turned the computer off for her.
What an unreasonable suggestion. No, she should not “blow off a medical appointment”, but she also should not have left Megan in that situation. Maybe you’re forgetting some key points so I’ll go ahead and run through the ones I feel are most relevant to this part of the discussion.
-
Megan had previously had computer privileges removed because of abuse. Further, her mother admits Megan didn’t always make good decisions, citing Megan’s ADD; trusting Megan to do the right thing (turn the computer off) was a mistake.
-
Megan “was the happiest she had ever been in her life” while interacting with this boy who, out of nowhere, turned on her. As an emotionally disturbed teenage girl who had been talking about killing herself since the third grade, this was probably a big deal.
-
Megan didn’t act in any way that would end her life until after her mother got home. At that time her mother’s focus should have been on the issue at hand rather than on how Megan had screwed up (which, IMO, she never should have been in a position to do). If your kid jumps on the bed even though you’ve told him a hundred times not to and he falls and breaks his arm, are you going to bitch at him before you take him to the emergency room? Not unless you’re an asshole. Megan was hurt and her mom should have helped her first.
For my part in this Megan being dead is irrelevant. If a friend related this story to me, minus the dead girl and fake boy parts but otherwise identical up to Megan storming off to her room and being left alone, as something that happened at her house with her daughter, I would think she was an inattentive parent at best. Does that mean I think she is at fault? No. Do I think she made mistakes? Hell yes.
I’ve got some distressing news for you, cupcake. **All ** parents are occasionally inattentive. We’re just people, with lives and worries and distractions of our own, and sometimes we miss stuff. Most people’s less shining moments in parenting don’t have such dire consequences, but a lot of that can be chalked up to pure luck.
Sampiro, seriously? You really think that Lori Drew has had it bad enough? Because IMO, even if you follow **Silver Fire’s ** line of thought and erase Megan’s death from the equation, her behavior was vile, vicious, and most notably, fucking insane. I’ve gotta tell you, I’d feel better served with her behind bars, because that’s where dangerously crazy people belong. Since that’s unlikely, it doesn’t exactly break my heart that “her life has been ruined”. Her life isn’t worth much.
If I can interject here and maybe ensure this doesn’t turn into a pitting of you, I think perhaps the point is being missed.
Whether or not Megan Meier’s parents were inattentive or partially at fault here is not really the issue. It’s POSSIBLE they could have done better; it’s also the truth that it’s unreasonable to think all parents should conduct 24-hour suicide watches on their kids. It’s easy to paint scenarios and hypotheticals wherein they prevent Megan from dying, and it’s easy to argue why they’re all unreasonable.
It’s all irrelevant, though, in terms of whether Lori Drew is guilty of a crime. The fact that it’s possible both Drew and the Meiers did something that allowed Megan to die’s not relevant; what matters is that Drew had the intention of committing a crime and then carried it out. Whether or not the Meiers were good parents is completely irrelevant, because
- The Meiers are not, legally, the victim; Megan (and, bizarrely, MySpace) were, and
- The inattentiveness of the victim, in any case, isn’t relevant.
If I leave my car unlocked and you come along and steal it, you’re guilty of a crime. I was stupid, and the insurance company might be pissed, but the judge isn’t going to take it easy on you. The Meiers might have been inattentive here, but it’s just not relevant to the culpability of Lori Drew.
Furthermore, we simply don’t have enough information to go on to determine just how bad the Meier’s parenting skills are.
Now, I realize you’re not advocating the Meiers be charged with anything; I’m just trying to stress the need to look at Drew’s actions as independent of their behaviour. A person’s responsibilities don’t end at the limits of other people’s personal failings.
Basically this is that the mom is a horrible person, but realistically there is no precedent for this and seemingly no charge they can get her on that will give her anywhere close to the punishment she deserves, so they’re trying anything they can to get her on something, which is good in theory.
My non lawyer guess is that getting her serious time on this charge is going to open up something big, as hell, who hasn’t created a fake hotmail account to mess with someone they know, either in fun or malicious?
First of all, the standard of proof between a grand jury and a criminal (petit) jury is vast. Unanimity is not required for a grand jury indictment; the standard of proof is “probable cause,” not “beyond a reasonable doubt,” and an accused, if he testifies at all, is not permitted to have a lawyer present. The prosecutor controls the presentation of evidence, and the classic defense lawyer’s lament is that if the prosecutor wishes, a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich for murder.
Now, that being said, here’s my general reaction to the charges. She is charged with exceeding her authorized access of a protected computer, and conspiracy to commit the same crime.
The law involved seems to be 18 USC § 1030, which provides in pertinent part:
The prosecution’s theory is that Lori Drew and Ashley Grill together agreed to create a fake web page on Myspace.com, in violation of Myspace’s terms of service and without Myspace’s authorization. If believed, that satisfies the “intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization” elements of the offense, and it satisfies the predicate elements of conspiracy.
Did they cause a physical injury to any person? I think that depends on whther they knew, or should have known, that their actions would result in a physical injury to the victim, Megan Miers.
Did they cause financial loss? I suspect the answer is yes, because Myspace has certain spent at least $5,000 tracking them down as part of the investigation, and the statute specifically says:
So if the fact-finder believes that they caused that loss, they can be found guilty.
Me. I’ve never created a fake mail account to “mess with” anyone. I suppose I’m not surprised that you have, however. But even then – did your actions cause $5,000 in damage or the physical injury to another person? If not, they don’t seem to fall within the ambit of this particular statute.
I haven’t. Some friends of mine did that to a girl in high school and I thought it was terrible. Luckily they abandoned it pretty quickly.
However, if this makes it possible for us to bring criminal charges against socks, that might have some interesting applications. 
Right. Here is the indictment: http://www.gfactorconsulting.com/Downloads/drewindictment.pdf
Raises hand
I haven’t created a false account anywhere.
I would guess sane people, or people who aren’t enormous flouncing assholes.
In my defense, I did not mean as in this case, I meant in an effort to playfully trick someone, not in any attempt to harm them, just as an “I gotcha” type joke. But the basis for this is fraud IIRC (I may be mistaken), not the intent of the fraud.
Like if I send a phony e-mail from my boss telling my friend at work they are fired, and they immediately jump out the window, am I a criminal?
I’ve never done it for that reason, but I have 2 of them for spam.
It’s possible to be convicted of conspiracy and acquitted of the other charges. Conspiracy is the agreement to commit the crime, so if you make a solemn blood pact to rob a bank with sombody but get arrested before you can, you’re still guilty of the conspiracy.