In the follow-up to the disturbing story of Megan Meier, Fox has now covered the story and like the local paper has decided not to disclose the identity of the woman who faked the identity of a cute boy named Josh to develop a friendship with her — only to crush her in a series of messages. After developing a crush on the boy, the woman allegedly sent such messages as ”Megan Meier is a slut. Megan Meier is fat.” The responsible mother was reportedly upset with how Megan was treating her daughter. The two families were friends and neighbors. The boy dumped her and Megan committed suicide. There remains no charges, and even more strangely no lawsuit. It is not clear why Fox is timid in publishing the names of the parents. They are involved in a very public dispute with highly disturbing allegations. There is no reason in torts that the newspaper would be charged with publishing the names. They sent these messages to a third party and have no privacy expectations in the messages. They have also been involved in later criminal actions against the father of Megan.Civil charges could range for negligence to child endangerment to intentional infliction of emotional distress. It is not that such allegations would be easy. They would be novel. However, the idea that these adults could engage in such horrific conduct without legal recourse is equally horrific. Megan’s parents are seeking a divorce. The father has a pending criminal charge from destroying the lawn of the other family. Such property destruction occurs when people have no legal outlet for their pain and desire for justice. It does not excuse the father but it raises questions about the response of the legal system to such conduct against a child.Even in the absence of legal action, the question is the duty of the media not to self-censure and withhold a key piece of information from this community: the names of the alleged culprits. For a prior blog entry, click hereFor the Fox story, click here For the CNN story, click here
SELECTED AS TOP LEGAL OPINION BLOG (2011)
SELECTED AS TOP LEGAL THEORY AND LAW PROFESSOR BLOG (2008)
Winner — Top Opinion Writer By Aspen Institute and The Week Magazine for Best Single-Issue Advocacy (Civil Liberties)
Recent Comments
 | bettykath on Boston Globe: Harvard Reported… |
| bettykath on Woman Admits That She Falsely … |
 | Malisha on Trayvon Martin Prosecutor Accu… |
| bettykath on Trayvon Martin Prosecutor Accu… |
 | God: the fundamental… on The Lure of Certainty is Fear … |
 | kittyantonikwakfer on Woman Admits That She Falsely … |
 | Brooklin Bridge on Boston Globe: Harvard Reported… |
| Brooklin Bridge on Boston Globe: Harvard Reported… |
 | Elaine M. on Boston Globe: Harvard Reported… |
 | anon nurse on Find The Kitteh Contest |
| bettykath on Boston Globe: Harvard Reported… |
| bettykath on Boston Globe: Harvard Reported… |
 | belle on Trayvon Martin Prosecutor Accu… |
 | shano on New Evidence in Zimmerman Case… |
| belle on Trayvon Martin Prosecutor Accu… |
The CNN report also did not publish the full name of the family responsible for the MySpace profile, and the reporter covering the story stated that they were not releasing it. However, they did show footage of they reporter at their house. They also showed a screencap of the police report Lori Drew filed that showed their last name in the text of the report and their home address and phone number at the top of the page. Therefore, the CNN report makes it blatantly obvious who these people are.
If they are concerned about legal (or other) ramifications enough to explicitly state that they will not identify the Drews, why do so through such roundabout methods? If it’s libel laws they are concerned about, they would only apply if CNN lied or showed a reckless disregard for the truth. If the idea is to protect the Drew’s daughter from further harm, then why make it so easy to identify them from this report? By not explicitly identifying the Drews, they are only fanning the flames.
Excellent points.
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 -all while knowing the girl was unstable.
This adult and her friends calculated the best way to achieve maximum mental distress and then carried out their plan. Even enticed others to join in the destruction of this child.
There are manslaughter convictions on the books that won based on looser ties to a person’s death than this. Child predators go to jail for following this scenerio.
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. She then used that power to inflict Great Mental Harm to this child… A physical rape and mental rape are both as equally destructive to a 13 year old child. Drew knew this (or should have known this) and still proceeded unabated.
This is so far beyond “Harassment”, 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 county detectives on the case need some scrutiny. Did they really investigate this crime thoroughly? Apparently not.
There had better be some charges…and some heads better role from this complete mismanagement of law enforcement.