Satan Is Real And After Your Children: Mentally Ill Lovesick Teen Kills Herself After Cruel Online Prank
Posted by Job on November 17, 2007
Please read this heartbreaking story:
msnbc.msn.com/id/21844203/
The synopsis: a 13 year old girl suffering from depression and ADD was tricked into thinking that she had an online romance with a boy named Josh. After 6 weeks, “Josh” broke up with her, and distraught she killed herself. As it turns out, this “Josh” does not exist, but rather was a cruel prank by a neighbor. As for Megan Meier, article says of her “She was described as a “bubbly, goofy” girl who loved spending time with her friends, watching movies and fishing with her dad.” Sadly, there was no mention of whether this girl had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.
Would having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ cured her mental illness? Would it have prevented her from being tricked and harassed on the Internet? Would it have prevented her from committing suicide? I have no answer for these questions. The answer that I do have is this: if Jesus Christ was this girl’s personal savior, then whatever evil she might have suffered in this life, her eternity with Jesus Christ would have been secure.
This notion that children are not yet accountable for their sins and will be given a free pass from God because of their age, and that evangelizing children somehow constitutes child abuse (though political, psychological, and other kinds of indoctrination through the government schools and mass media are obviously OK!) needs to be rejected. There are girls 11 years old and younger having children, becoming parents. So of course children at a very young age have a degree of knowledge of right from wrong and the consequences of their actions even if it is shrouded in emotional and intellectual immaturity. Thus, they are able to hear and receive the gospel of Jesus Christ through faith despite that same immaturity.
So please, parents, talk to your children about accepting Jesus Christ and the eternal consequences of not doing so. The Child Evangelism Fellowship Ministry has some excellent tools that you can use to communicate the message of Jesus Christ to children as young as 5. The person who started the ministry said that he was inspired by reading a sermon from Charles Spurgeon, which stated “A child of five, if properly instructed can as truly believe and be regenerated.” Please visit http://www.cefonline.com and use it to help you explain the gospel of Jesus Christ today. Do not tarry or equivocate, for as this sad episode illustrates, tomorrow is neither promised to you or to your dear children!
bottlecappie said
I think you have shown very poor taste, using the tragic death of a young girl with mental health problems as an opportunity to proselytize.
I doubt “Satan” had anything to do with this young girl’s suicide. I think the blame is rightly laid at the feet of the adults who created the fake MySpace profile and proceeded to use it to mentally abuse a girl who they well knew had emotional and mental issues. They don’t get to say “the Devil made me do it,” that’s a cop-out, and any rational person knows it.
Phil Macrackin said
Hey here’s a thought…..the people who were teasing her on the myspace website were believers of Jesus. The evil of Satin live within your house rolling around in money and SUV’s.
Good luck
healtheland said
bottlecappie:
“I think you have shown very poor taste, using the tragic death of a young girl with mental health problems as an opportunity to proselytize.”
And a good time to proselytize according to you would be when?
“I doubt “Satan” had anything to do with this young girl’s suicide. I think the blame is rightly laid at the feet of the adults who created the fake MySpace profile and proceeded to use it to mentally abuse a girl who they well knew had emotional and mental issues. They don’t get to say “the Devil made me do it,” that’s a cop-out, and any rational person knows it.”
So let us say that Satan does exist. How, then, or through what means, would this Satan operate?
healtheland said
Phil Macrackin: And your purpose for participating in this discussion was what?
bottlecappie said
Healtheland – A good time to proselytize would be at a tent revival. I do not believe in an entity named “Satan”, and I surely have no knowledge of how such an imaginary being would “operate” in the real world, outside of the minds and imaginations of those who believe in such mythical creatures.
Eden Hadassah said
Because anyone can lie about who they are on the internet, adults as well as children have allowed themselves to express things to others that they wouldn’t normally do in person. My daughter had as simular experience with a girl from her school. This girl befriended my daughter when we moved to our home two years ago. She was sweet, and very friendly with my daughter. But my daughter started noticing things about her that were “off.” She struggled with the thought of giving up this friendship, being that this girl was her only friend at the time. Her first instinct were correct. After a year of friendship, and their common enjoyment of talking to each other through email and on AIM, the girl would freely let my daughter access her email account at her house. The girl started acting more strange, to the point of ignoring her, and telling her lies about her family (she was the daughter of a very wealthy CEO of a multinational oil company) so my daughter broke off the friendship. The girl, out of shear boredom and anger towards my daughter for breaking off the friendship, made up a yahoo account of a pretend boy, and would send my daughter these love letters. My daughter who was not allowed to date, brought these emails to my attention, because she didn’t know who this person was, and he seemed to know her. In the emails he would ask if she would like to go on a date, or meet after school, and would even comment on what she had been wearing that day. Even though she broke off the friendship with this girl, the girl would still send her emails, saying that she knew the boy, and that he really did like her. The emails would come from him and then less then two minutes later she would get an email from the girl. I put two and two together, and I was personally shocked at how manipulitive this girl was. I told my daughter to just collect the emails, and that we would take them to school and get this so-called boy’s phone number and get the parents involved. But my daughter decided to go one step further. She went into the girls email, (she remembered the password)and saw all these emails from the boy to this girl. So my daughter thought, “If my mom is right and she made the screen name, lets see if the boy has the same password as the girl. Sure enough, it was the same.
It was confrontation time. Because of this situation, the girl has lost her friends, and totally embarrassed her family.
Parents need to have a close relationship with their children, as well as their children having a relationship with the Lord.
Many parents would be shocked to know what christian children do on their spare time. I have had the opportunity to know what these girls do, who come from christian households. Because my children can tell me anything, and we talk about everything they may have a question about, their friends think that is “cool.” They confess more to me about their lives and what they go through with their parents. When we lived in the Pocono’s for example, my older girls went to high school where a very large population of the kids both boys and girls were homosexual and bisexual. Christian girls would confess their “sleep overs” were orgies. These were girls who came from homes of very outstanding parents, bible based believers, who did not know their daughters at all. They were not allowed to date, and the way they got around it, was to have sex with their girlfriends under their parents roof no less. Their drug problems were not illegal drugs, but perscription “cocktails” of different types of meds. taken from their parents that may have just been in the medicine cabinet from an operation or medical condition. Parents must know their children, and their children must feel safe in their own home confiding in their parents. Sometimes I think that is the toughest part of being a parent.
Eden Hadassah said
Bottlecappie:
What you just said has been satan’s greatest trick!
Here are some of the tricks…
Make people believe that he is red with a pitch fork.
Make people believe that he is all powerful.
Make people believe that he doesn’t exist.
If he can make someone believe that he has a pitch fork and is red with horns, they won’t see what he really looks like, as described in the bible. So those who are scared of this satan will be looking for the boogie man with the pitch fork stirring the caldron in hell.
If he can make some believe that he is all powerful, then their lives become destroyed and in effective taking on a victim role and acting like a “martyr.”
But if he can make some believe that he doesn’t exist at all, then that person will doubt that God even exists.
healtheland said
bottlecappie: and why should proselytizing be limited to tent revivals? Simple … you only want proselytizing to be done to people who come to a religious service seeking to be converted. Which, of course, is not proselytizing, but only accepting those that are already desiring to be Christian. You oppose any efforts to spread Christianity past those who decide to become Christian independently of their own accord. Am I correct? Of course I am, because that is what you basically just said. So now I ask you: why do you have this belief?
Charles D. said
bottlecappie:
Your statement sort of caught me by surprise, and is somewhat foolish to say the least, and for the following reason: Your comments are tantamount to a “circular quiry.” You have yet to say whether or not you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. You imply that you do not believe in God, but, you lack the courage to state so outright. You have no such problem waving Satan’s banner. This would tend to confuse infant christians.
You said that you do not believe in Satan, but your comments suggests otherwise. Furthermore, you’re doing Satan’s work. admitedly, I had to ask myself: Why am I even responding to your bait or care even about what you think. I have determined that you do not believe in God. The basis for that determination is as follows: you said in pertinent part that:
[I do not believe in an entity named “Satan”, and I surely have no knowledge of how such an imaginary being would “operate” in the real world, outside of the minds and imaginations of those who believe in such mythical creatures.]
The facts are, because you do not believe in Satan, by default, you do not believe in God. But for a truth you should have stopped at the “surely I have no knowledge…” part; and therein lie the dangers. Your lack of knowledge and your non-belief, is going to send you where you do not want to go. The eternal lake of fire. Believe that!
May you change, recapture your rightful mind, and come to know the saving grace of my Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ.
Charles
bottlecappie said
I was raised in the Christian church, and went to Christian schools for 12 years. I do believe in God, but not the patriarchal Christian God-the-Father. I believe that God is in us, and God is in the interactions between people, and in the beauty and power of nature.
I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was a real person, a gifted teacher and preacher, an enlightened human. I believe that there is much value in his message of love. I especially like the gnostic gospels and the messages they contain.
I do not believe the Bible is fact. It may contain truth, but I do not believe it is meant to be taken literally. I do not like what fundamentalists have done to Christianity. I do not like the way a message of love has been twisted to justify bigotry and hatred. I think it’s awful, the way some fundamentalist Christians will pick and choose which parts of the Old Testament they think should be enforced and then use certain Bible verses to persecute people who live differently then they do. These actions are born out of fear and hate, not love.
The original post in this thread is a perfect example of the kind of behavior that drove me from the church to begin with. Instead of offering a message of compassion and love to a bereaved family that has just lost their daughter, the writer thought it would be a good opportunity to preach about the perils of damnation for the unsaved.
There is nothing cirular about my statments. I said a good time to prostletize would be a tent revival. Indefinite article, “a”, does not mean the only time it would be appropriate, it was however the first one that came to my mind. I’m sure there might be others, but I’m also sure that it’s never appropriate to opportunize a horrible situation like the suicide and mental abuse of a young girl. The only apporpriate response to that is condolence, or maybe outrage.
I directly answered the question, assuming that satan did exist, how would satan operate. I don’t know. Then I stated that I don’t believe in satan. It is not impossible to believe in God and not believe in satan. You just have to reject the paradigm of dualism that so infects much western thought. God encompasses everything. Evil exists because everything exists. I don’t appreciate your assumption that I lack knowledge, and you are surely incorrect in that assumption. You are the one with the fautly logic Charles D, basing your arguemnt on premises to which I never agreed.
Eden Hadassah said
Bottlecappie,
Are you a member of the Unity Church, run by professed messiah Sun Myong Moon?
I would challange your thoughts of love. The reason I challenge them is that they are bigoted towards a loving and merciful God. Can you really believe in Jesus? Who sent him? And why did he come? Why should he have come to teach love or peace? According to you, Satan is mythical, which means that no evil actually exists, and everyone goes along as they perceive it. So while some see the world as a dasterdly place, others will see the same world as one of only beauty and oneness. Why even have a concept of God? Your brand of love is bigoted towards God, because it denies his generosity in that he sent his one and only son to become an atoning sacrifice for us. It is Jesus who came so that we might be reconciled back to his Father.
It is a love that is bigoted towards God by saying that he isn’t the only way, the only truth and the only life. It is your concept of love, which in the end is not really love at all, but a feeling that comes and goes. Love is not a feeling, but an action. Love is enduring, not a superficial feel good tool. Mothers and fathers discipline their children because they love them, yet a child may view this as unjust and unloving.
Just as there are bigots that will claim that one race is inferior to another, your bigotry claims that patriarical order is inferior to your brand of religion.
It is true that many things through the ages perpetrated by men in the name of God towards women were wrong, but that has nothing to do with God, but with man and his own brand of “love.”
healtheland said
bottlecappie: Your statement “I do not like what fundamentalists have done to Christianity” is historically inaccurate. Are you aware that we have documents from as early as 110 AD that attest that the faith of the early church was fundamentalist Christianity? See, what folks such as yourself have done is deviate from historical Christianity, claim that your deviation is “true Christianity”, and then claim that fundamentalists destroyed it.
For instance, your claim that fundamentalists pick and choose which of the Old Testament to obey and which not to is simply inaccurate, because the New Testament itself says that we are to no longer keep the Old Testament law. The New Testament says that the Old Testament is useful for teaching and instruction, but that non – Jewish Christians are to keep the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles. This is evident for anyone that has spent any amount of time reading Galatians, Romans, and Hebrews, so folks who claim that fundamentalist hypocrites are selectively obeying the Old Testament are themselves being dishonest, knowing full well that these Christians are only obeying the portions of the Old Testament that the New Testament tells us to. You folks also know that the gospels record one of the reasons why Jesus Christ was opposed and ultimately crucified was the charge that He was teaching Jews to abandon the Old Testament laws.
As far as claiming to have appreciation for the gnostic gospels, of course you realize that we have documents from as early as 175 AD where Christians declared the gnostic gospels as heresy. Further, the gnostics did not agree. Some gnostics were ascetics, some were antinomian. Some gnostics rejected most of the New Testament, others rejected the entire Old Testament. Also, the books written by the gnostics generally were not written in their own name, but co – opted the names of Christians who had long died. The gnostic gospels contain no information on the historical Jesus because they were written by people who never knew Jesus, or even anyone that Jesus taught.
It is easy for you to go around spouting that fundamentalists ruined Christianity, because people think that you are speaking of the modern context and guys like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc. But when you are consider the reality: that these “fundamentalists” go back to the earliest historical Christian writings that we have, then I am just sorry, but you are going to have to alter your manner of speech. Instead of claiming to be distressed at the fundamentalists that ruined Christianity, instead be historically truthful and say that your distress is at the people who choose not to join you in abandoning it.
DanCnKC said
Ms. Drew used the same same exact mode of operation as a child predator enacts in the seduction of a child.
Drew posed as a member of the opposite sex and spent weeks and weeks luring this girl into a relationship.
But yet it went further. The adult Drew formed a heated relationship with the 13 year old girl. She worked hard to gain the girl’s confidence. She exploited the girl intimately by posing as a boyfriend. She enacted the same methods child predators use to groom their victims.
Then the woman emotionally raped this child. She took her supposed love and sexual stimulation and crushed the girl emotionally with them.
This girl was mentally raped by a mother and her employee. This adult and her friends played this girl into an emotional high… and then pulled the plug when it would inflict the highest possible damage.
There are manslaughter convictions on the books that won based on looser ties to a person’s death than this.
Ms. Drew is the clear definition of a child predator. She used the internet to stalk, entice and lure a 13 year old girl into a romantic, sexually sparked, full fledged relationship.
Other child predators use the same vile tactics to seduce and lure a girl into trusting them. Other child predators use the internet to roll play the relationship, a clear example of “inflicting harm and mental distress”.
This is so far beyond “Harrasment”, this is full fledged exploitation of a child.
Is the local police of this county out of their minds to think that NO charge will stick?
Is the local District Attorneys office serious if they don’t think this girl’s rights have been thoroughly trampled by a grown woman?
Does the DA really expect people to roll over while this woman goes without so much as even a single charge?
Does even a speeding ticket register a more serious offense than this?
_____________
Last of all, the very worst. Ms. Drew remains defiant and indignant. Claims the girl was already on the edge mentally.
Ms. Drew denies wrong doing and insists she bears no guilt in her actions.
She justifies her actions as being “protective of her daughter”… Please tell me how she was protecting someone by mind raping a 13 year old child?
To add insult to incredible injury…. The Drews file charges against the family that lost this child.
The Drews, in a final act of ultimate hate, seek to hurt this family who lost a beloved child. She seeks to harm them financially….
Just as MS. Drew attacked an innocent little girl, Ms. Drew now attacks a grief stricken family – again seeking to harm someone’s very life.
This woman is evil incarnate
This woman has county officials protecting her…
The same county officials who would put ANY other child exploiter in jail.
It would appear we have a few corrupt city officials. Officials who need to be fired
Perhaps the police should be investigated more closely for their lack of intervention.
Perhaps the county detectives on the case need some scrutiny. Did they really investigate this crime thoroughly? Apparently not.
Why is the media protecting names here? Why wouldn’t this story be like any others ? Why is this horrific story coming to light like this a year later?
There had better be some charges…and some county employees had better lose their job or this could happen time and time again.
Charles D. said
bottlecappie:
Sooo you’re going to play the old ‘westrn thought” card huh? Okay, I’ll bite. But first what are “the Christian church?” and “Christian schools” that you attended?” Fill-in the blanks for me, please. What branch or denomination were the Christian church and schools? Be more specific.
What I sense is someone who is lukewarm about everything! Sort of like the church at Laodicea, spoken about in Revelation at 3:16. Your initial response is filled with more “buzz words” than a saw mill, e.g., “enlightened human;” and in reference to the Bible, you say: “may contain truth,” NOW LISTEN UP, HERE COMES YOUR CIRCULAR STATEMENT: “Evil exists because everything exists.” Your are not the author of that statement. After you’ve answered my questions, and if you are interested, I will tell you the author of that statement and school of that thought. Then you can “goggle” his back ground and religous beliefs.
One of an abundance of hurdles and obstacles you’ve had seem to be having still and thus deprieve you of a deeper understanding of the Bible and a more meaningful relationship with God rest in the facts that you approach both with a pseudo-intellectual facade; which while it may not be an abomination, I believe it to be disdainful to God. Did you know that “but God chose the foolish things of the world that he might put to shame those who are wise. God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put to shame the things that are strong;..” NT 1 Corinthians 1: 27 World English Bible.
At “v18 The message about the cross doesn’t make any sense to lost people. But for those of us who are being saved, it is God’s power at work. 19As God says in the Scriptures, “I will destroy the wisdom of all who claim to be wise. I will confuse those who think they know so much.” The OT also, is filled with the same message. It is a fool that is wise in his own conceit, don’t be counted among their numbers!
I had to laugh after reading your “fear and hate” comment, because you were describing the exact oppositie of me personally, but of real christians everywhere. Do you know that christians know that God is not a God of confusion? More importantly, fear is not of God “For God did not give christians a spirit of fear, but a spirit of POWER, of love and of self-discipline 1Timothy 1:7. You my brother have failed to follow the clear warning of 1Timothy 4:1-2 which says in the NIV “The Spirit clearly says that in latter times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.”
Pointblank! You cannot timidly half believe in apart of who God is More importantly, If you do not believe in Satan, not only do you not believe the Bible, you do not believe in God! And where your pseudo-intelligence fail to serve you well is: the fact that you say you believe in God doesn’t make it so. The fact IS if you do not believe in satan, whom God said He created and kicked out of Heaven because of his pride, then by default, you do not believe in God. Thus not says Charles, thus said the Lord!
I truly regret that I offended you and you did not “appreciate” my assumption that you lack knowledge,” but the evidence was there. You can pontificate, you can like it, love it, lick it or lump it; but if I think that you can be saved, I am obligated to warn you you, then, it is you that have to choose. It is my hope that you choose life, choose life, choose life!
Be Blessed and I pray that you come to know the saving grace of Jesus, the Christ
Charles
Eden Hadassah said
Dan,
It will be revealed, and in a series of events more than enough will be exposed about things not even covered by the media.
Her own flesh will betray her.
These types of things have happened before with cheerleaders and their mothers. At the core is a woman who lives vicariously through her daughter, trying to “protect” her because of the bitterness and hate in her own heart concerning things long past, which still fester. She passed the legacy of broken female relationships on to her daughter, and never showed her daughter how to cope with rejection or feelings of betrayal, because she herself does not understand. Her heart is calloused. This kind of thing is far more common than one might expect.
I pray for both families. It was heart breaking for me to watch her father cry in absolute brokenness on the news. I mourn with him and his family. God does bring justice, comfort and strength, and my prayer is that he strengthen this family right now in the time of their bereavement.
bottlecappie said
Charles D:
I am left with a difficult task: one, rise to the bait and wallow in the mire of your psuedo-intellectual discussion, and try to steer back to the point that you are desperate to avoid, the gross and demening behavior of someone who would use another’s personal tragedy as a opportunity to sell their personal ideology to the world. I shall attempt to accomplish both, forgive me if I fall short on either. Charles while you corrctly identified my comments above logically as statements, you obviously lack the philosophical background to to comprehend why that is an oxymoronic statement, My “CIRCULAR STATEMENT” is not circular, as statement cannot be circular, only arguments can be circular, statements have no premises for the conclusions to reference, therefore can not be circular. Second, you chastise me for the fact that I am not the original author of the statement claiming that they speak for chrisitianity as do you, but you weakly cobble together a text using out of context scrpitures passages and your own limited belief system, but they lack the weight of real conviction or even a well thought truly logical argument. I tried to show you that people, even from the time period of 110 AD(as healtheland pointed out) and the author you speak of had different perspectives on what is chrisitanity, and that what we today call “fundamentalism” is a movement that seeks to establish one particular perspective as the only correct path, that is clearly your agenda as well, as such I will not respond to any further posts from you that don’t correctly seperate your personal beliefs from those of chrisitanity at large or that attempt to address logical fallacies without using correct logical form. Finally I suggest you read the three Big A’s of chrisitian intellectual doctrine (Aquinas, Anselm, and Augustine) more than just quotes anyway, and try to grow a little as a christian. Fianlly, I would like to point out that much like the original post which took advantage of a tragic incident to push it’s own agenda, you have taken advatage of my personal beliefs to push yours, very selfish, and in my opinion un-christian.
Charles D. said
bottlecappie, Please……
First of all, you will respond because most psuedo-intellectuals and “wannabes alike, have enormous egos. Secondly, you failed drastically to address either of the points that you attempted. Third (and I know you will find this difficult to believe, but, what the heck). To this day and hour, I have not read the post attached hereon. Admittedly, I did gear a television broadcast in passing, and had formed my own feelings and belief before I ever scribbled the first comment to you.
I position have nothing to do with the totally unfortunate episode relating to the child and her remaining family. You will notice that my original comments to you, had to do exclusively with Your stated belief, or, non-belief as the case maybe. I am not interested in arguing with you (as you seem to think). That would be an encounter that you would both, lose and appear foolish. I do not wish that on you because you have shown by your utterences that you take self-image very important.
Now based on what I know of the unfortunate circumstance regarding the young child’s suicide, My personal feelings are the parents shares a causal result. One have to wonder about the prior relationship between the child and her parents. Had the parental relationship deteriorated to the level that the child could not or did not share the fact that she had problem(s) with the culprits in the first place. I simply cannot imagine either of my children finding something so disturbing on-line targeting the child and 1) fail to bring me into it if I did not already know about it and 2) Neither can I imagine my child engaging in discourse with either adults or superior age-group that would lead to such consequences, without that having been their very last internet dialogue, EVER!
Seemingly, the child needed a level of protection that was not available from her parents. The child was not sufficiently mature to involved the right people and was obviously concerned about external perception (much like someone else I know).
Now, if you choose not to respond, well I’ve done most of what I can do because I saw that you have been mislead. However, your parting shot that I “have taken advatage of my personal beliefs to push yours, very selfish, and in my opinion un-christian.”
Well please know that I do not have an agenda, in the sense that you speak about. Furthermore, I am far from selfish inasmuch as I used God’s good time and energy to bring a warning to you, and now I know that you neither want or need this from me or any believer. Finally, you should be one of the last people to speak about “un-christian,” because Christianity is contrary to your belif system. You cannot have it both ways.
I tried Lord,
Charles
dancnkc said
On Wednesday, October 21st, city officials enacted an ordinance designed to address the public outcry for justice in the Megan Meier tragedy. The six member Board of Aldermen made Internet harassment a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a $500 fine and 90 days in jail.
Does this new law provide any justice for Megan? Does this law provide equitable relief for a future victim or actually weaken the current law?
I reject the premise of this new law and believe it completely misses the mark. The reasoning behind this opinion is that city officials have consistently treated this case as an Internet harassment case instead of a child welfare/exploitation case.
Classifying this case a harassment issue completely fails to address the most serious aspects of the methods Lori Drew employed to lead this youth to her demise. The Vice disagrees that harassment was even a factor in this case until just a couple of days before Megan’s death.
Considering this case a harassment issue is incorrect because during the 5 weeks Lori Drew baited and groomed her victim, the attention was NOT unwanted attention. It was not harassment at all. It was invited attention. Megan participated in the conversations willingly because she was lured, manipulated and exploited without her knowledge.
This law willfully sets a precedent that future child exploiters and predators can use to reclassify their cases to harassment issues. In effect, the law enacted to give Megan justice, may make her even more vulnerable. So long as the child victim doesn’t tell the predator to stop, even a harassment charge may not stick with the right circumstances and a good defender.
Every aspect of this case follows the same procedural requirement used to convict a Child Predator. A child was manipulated by an adult. A child was engaged in sexually explicit conversation (as acknowledged by Lori Drew herself). An adult imposed her will on a child by misleading her, using a profile designed to sexually or intimately attract the 13 year old Megan.
Lori then utilized the power she had gained over this child to cause significant distress and endangerment to that child. She even stipulated to many of these activities in the police report she filed shortly after Megan’s death.
We can go on and on here, but the parallels between this case and many other child predator cases that are successfully prosecuted bear striking similarities.
Child Predator laws do not require much more than simply proving that an adult has engaged a minor in sexually explicit conversation. Lori Drew has already stipulated that her conversations with Megan were sometimes sexual for a child Megan’s age.
City officials who continue to ignore this viable, documented admission and continue to address this issue as harassment are intentionally burying their heads in the sand, when the solution is staring them right in the face. Why?
On June 5th, 2006, Governor Matt Blunt signed into law stiff penalties for convicted sex offenders. The Vice believes that officials continually reject a child predator classification of this case in order to keep the penalty of this offense out of this harsher realm.
Opponents of this law are active in defeating this law not by changing it, but by disqualifying cases like Megan’s from ever being heard.
There are several other child exploitation laws on the books. To date, none of them have even been considered by City, State and Federal officials in this case. I’m outraged that a motion was never even filed, so that the case could at least be argued before a judge or jury.
Those satisfied with this response out of Missouri officials need to think through the effect this law will truly have. It quite honestly has the potential to directly undermine Jessica’s law. It quiet easily gives prosecutors a way out of prosecuting child endangerment and child predator cases in the future.
Beware the wolf in sheep’s clothing here.
Danny Vice
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com
Hypatia said
Lori Drew is a psychopath. That part is clear.
But more disturbing than that are the actions of authorities: If it had been an adult MALE that “carried on” in a sexually explicit way with a 13 year old girl, even if it WERE for the purposes of revenge for his teen daughter, he’d be locked up as a pedophile.
Second, there are al-READY laws on the books that cover this type of harassment. For chrissake: just implement them!
What is particularly chilling to me, is that Lori Drew knew that the victim was known to be suicidal in the past. That means that her statement to her that the “world would be better off without you” or whatever it was… is even MORE chilling: it means she was TRYING to steer this girl to suicide. It means she had a desire to push it in that direction, and did so.
Reminds me of Charles Manson. He never “technically” put his own hands upon his victims either, but he “made it happen” by manipulating people, I mean that’s the premise upon which he was convicted: that he had INCITED it.
Same thing here. Lori Drew incited this suicide and should be just as responsible as Manson was when he incited those murders—and she should also be treated just like any other adult who engages in online relationships of a sexual nature with under-aged children.
Tamara Perez said
Satan, aside. Lori Drew should be indicted on murder charges in accordance with her obvious and cruel manipulation of this girl. At least, we can all agree on that??
Job said
Tamara Perez:
I agree that what Lori Drew did was evil. However, I do not know what law applies to driving a person to kill themselves.
Tamara Perez said
Job,
You are right. I agree that there are no laws that would apply to this situation. I suppose it is just one of those events that become cautionary tales. Such a shame.
dancnkc said
While the Megan Meier case seems outrageous and unique, it isn’t unique. Hundreds of cases of egregious and heinous acts go on every day with the same excuses out of our lawmakers.
One such other case….The case of Nikki Catsouras, is a classic example of disgusting, hateful activity against innocent victims, while our lawmakers excuse themselves from enacting laws to prevent this.
The excuse lawmakers use to let themselves off the hook stem from the growth of the Internet and how fast it’s changing. This is a sham.
Chat rooms, message boards, instant messengers and email have been in existence for far over a decade now. While the software used to transmit messages changes slightly, the basic essence of using the Internet to send a message is largely the same. Is a decade or two long enough to establish some basic decency laws in regards to Internet usage?
I’ve posted the Nikki Catsouras story along with many details about the Megan Meier case so the inactivity out of our lawmakers towards these types of cases can be clearly seen.
Those who are interested in learning about cases like Megan’s and Nikki’s case are encouraged to drop by and comment on them if you like. I have a couple of polls set up as well. Danny Vice would like to hear your point of view.
Public awareness of the problem and discussions about possible solutions are the best way to pressure elected officials into action instead of excuse making.
I invite you to come by and share your opinion.
Danny Vice
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com
esbee said
“I do not believe in an entity named “Satan”, ”
then its a funny thing that Jesus talked to this imaginary being!!!
To those who do not believe,(why are you wasting your time reading sites like this anyway?) there is a battle between good and evil and the Bible tells who wins in the end. Satan came to steal, kill and destroy and even if you do not believe in Satan, just look at the world around you.
Then to say if God is so powerful, why doesn’t He prevent the evil…well, then means then which of your sins would you give up, because if He stops one He has to stop all, but He did not create puppets, He created beings with free will to choose.