« I should say | Main | Are we really descended from monkeys? »

The source of complaint

28 Nov 2007 12:12 pm

The mind boggles.

DARDENNE PRAIRIE, Mo., Nov. 21 — Megan Meier died believing that somewhere in this world lived a boy named Josh Evans who hated her. He was 16, owned a pet snake, and she thought he was the cutest boyfriend she ever had.

Tina and Ron Meier with a photo of their daughter Megan, 13, who killed herself last year after an online romance ended.

Josh contacted Megan through her page on MySpace.com, the social networking Web site, said Megan’s mother, Tina Meier. They flirted for weeks, but only online — Josh said his family had no phone. On Oct. 15, 2006, Josh suddenly turned mean. He called Megan names, and later they traded insults for an hour.

The next day, in his final message, said Megan’s father, Ron Meier, Josh wrote, “The world would be a better place without you.”

Sobbing, Megan ran into her bedroom closet. Her mother found her there, hanging from a belt. She was 13.

Six weeks after Megan’s death, her parents learned that Josh Evans never existed. He was an online character created by Lori Drew, then 47, who lived four houses down the street in this rapidly growing community 35 miles northwest of St. Louis.

Why would a forty-seven year old woman do this? Because her daughter had been slighted:

In seventh grade, Megan Meier had tried desperately to join the popular crowd at Fort Zumwalt West Middle School, only to be teased about her weight, her mother said. At the beginning of eighth grade last year, she transferred to Immaculate Conception, a nearby Catholic school. Within three months, Ms. Meier said, her daughter had a new group of friends, lost 20 pounds and joined the volleyball team.

At one time, Lori Drew’s daughter and Megan had been “joined at the hip,” said Megan’s great-aunt Vicki Dunn. But the two drifted apart, and when Megan changed schools she told the other girl that she no longer wanted to be friends, Ms. Meier said.

When the family found out who "Joshua Evans" was--six weeks after it had happened, and not from the Drews, but from a neighbor whose daughter was involved--the Meiers took a little revenge on an inanimate object:


Shortly before Megan’s death, the Meiers had agreed to store a foosball table the Drews had bought as a Christmas surprise for their children. When the Meiers learned about the MySpace hoax, they attacked the table with a sledgehammer and an ax, Ms. Meier said, and threw the pieces onto the Drews’ driveway.

Under the circumstances, this seems rather restrained. Nonetheless, the Drews filed a police report complaining that, after all, all she did was mess with the mind of a 13 year old girl whom she knew to be on antidepressants. It's not like she put the belt in Megan's hand or anything, and besides, the death of your child is no excuse for destroying a brand new football table.

Chutzpah seems curiously inadequate. Who are these people?

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/17794

Comments (33)

I would like to think people like this are rare exceptions to the rule, but I often wonder if I am correct.

That story is revolting on many, many levels.

And the article concludes by stating that the two families still live only four houses apart on the same street. I can't even imagine.

Cyberstalking is one thing, and it's bad enough. This was effectively cybermurder. I mean, what else do you call it?

Unbelievable.

Yancey, there's stories like this every day somewhere in this country. Some people are just psychopaths, or flip their lids for whatever reason, and unfortunately it sometimes doesn't show up until they kill someoone.

Times like this make me wish I believed in a deity, so I could believe in infallible and eternal punishment.

I have heard tell that the local community has been expressing displeasure with the Drews' activity in an extra-legal manner, and while I cannot approve of such activity on grounds of the rule of law, I find myself unable to be very upset about it either.

Something is wrong with this person.

What's really puzzling is that 13 year-old girls are quite capable of doing nasty things to each other, without the aid of their parents. Why did this mom feel the need to carry on such an elaborate charade, when her daughter could have done the tried-and-true thing of spreading rumors about her former best friend behind her back?

I find it interesting that they can't charge Mrs. Drew with involuntary manslaughter or something. That's what Jack McCoy would do.

In her warped mind, if she accepts the smashed foosball table as deserved, she admits to blame in the child's death. To preserve the fallacy, she must pursue "justice" for the foosball table. Her depravity is consistent.

That story is just sad.

Njorl's cognitive dissonance theory has a lot going for it, in my opinion.

I heard about this story before, but not the foosball table angle of it. Horrifying.

I am surprised that they printed the name of Ms. Lori Drew. Other media reports I have seen of this story have avoided doing that.
Good for them.

If they did that to a child of mine, they'd be lucky if I only burned down their house.

Leaving aside the horrific behavior of not taking responsibility for causing the death of someone through your online antics, can someone please tell me what the hell is wrong with people? This woman was 47 years old. Almost half a century. And she's pulling stunts that people should have grown out of by middle school. How can people get the better part of the way through middle age without, at some point in life, realizing you have to grow the hell up.

This is the kind of thing that's going to be turned into an argument against online anonymity. It's the strongest possible argument I can think of right now; how can you support the ability to be anonymous online when it's being used to literally drive people to kill themselves? And I hate it because I think online anonymity is very important, and then something like this happens.

I despair for the human race sometimes.

TFA:

a St. Charles County Sheriff’s Department spokesman, Lt. Craig McGuire, said that what Ms. Drew did “might’ve been rude, it might’ve been immature, but it wasn’t illegal.”

Are there no cyberstalking statutes that would apply??? My god. A girl was deliberately harassed and driven to suicide! And all they can come up with is a misdemeanor?

This woman was 47 years old.

Kids harass each other all the time, and some are driven to suicide over it I'm sure; that's tragic too but I can see lesser punishment being meted out to idiot minor kids who don't really know what they're doing. This was an adult doing it to a child she reasonably might be expected to have known was unstable. Ugh. This is ugly. Foul.

You know, this 47-year-old might have thought it was all a game. After all, that's all online is anyway, right? One big game. Just one big playground and everyone knows it's all for fun. Well, let this be a wakeup call. Some people take this stuff seriously.

This is even weirder and more awful than the Janna St. James story.

Posted by liberalrob | November 28, 2007 2:43 PM

Believe me, I have no disagreement with you on the repugnance of her behavior. What I was trying to comment on was the possibility that "this 47-year-old might have thought it was all a game". For the love of God, by age 47, you'd think, you'd hope that someone would have grown out of that sort of thing. I mean usually by the time one gets out of high school, it begins to occur that this sort of play to be the prom queen or drive to be one of the cool kids is for little kids. You begin to realize you have things like a job, a family, or a life to worry about. That what the mother was supposed to be trying to teach her daughter. Not dragging herself down to the level of junior high head games.

Hmm. If that'd been my kid, I'd probably have strapped Mrs. Drew to the table before going at it.

I think this is the inevitable outcome of parents' management of their children's social lives. In my day (said the 41-year-old) if I'd complained to my mom about the girl down the street ditching me, she would have said Girls will be girls, make a new friend. But she didn't schedule or supervise "play dates" or attend all my sporting events or really know where I was between school and dinner either. This mom seems to have a little too much invested in her child's emotional life.

Are there no cyberstalking statutes that would apply??? My god. A girl was deliberately harassed and driven to suicide! And all they can come up with is a misdemeanor?

I think the issue was that Drew didn't stalk or harass Megan, she tricked her--the suicide was the result of "emotional fraud", as it were. Megan's involvement with Josh was entirely voluntary, even greatly desired, and the fact that her response to Josh's later rejection was suicide is, ultimately, Megan's own responsibility.

Certainly Lori Drew is indirectly responsible, and in a way that was totally foreseeable, making her a perfect scumbag. Personally, I'm not sure what I'd do in the situation of Megan's parents--I know I'd be thinking very seriously about much more than trashing their foosball table. But legally there's no remedy for them.

Lori Drew's business is getting some bad reviews on Yelp because of this:

http://www.yelp.com/biz/PsQxK7u59fv1kPBVn7cvsw

Wow, this is charming: The daughter of Lori Drew created a blogspot blog called 'MeganHadItComing'. It's still up as of posting this.

The next day, in his final message, said Megan’s father, Ron Meier, Josh wrote, “The world would be a better place without you.”

If that was 47-year-old Lori Drew typing that one in...and I imagine there's no way to ever prove that...but if she typed that one and sent it to a girl she was systematically harassing, committing "emotional fraud" on, and knew she was on antidepressants...well, it's not too hard for me to connect those dots, ya know?

As surely as going over there, putting a gun to that poor girl's head and pulling the trigger.

Perhaps that story is a good thing to remember before typing some of the more caustic and personal statements I've seen posted from both sides, on this and other blogs.

It doesn't take someone's death to make a cruel comment cruel. The behavior of the woman was not bad because the poor girl killed herself. It was bad because it was mean, irrespective of the outcome.

The next time you are tempted to push the invective envelope responding on a thread, remember anonymity goes both ways. You don't know who it is you are attacking or where they are in life. Courtesy exists for a reason. We should all remember that.

I find it appropriate that her advertising business is now being attacked, her clients contacted from people all over the nation, and their pictures and online activity put all over the net.

She failed to realize the tubes are a two way, not just one, and now the online community is coming together to make their real life a living hell...

..and I'm proud they are! There's a word for people like her, SCUM. I'd say keep it civil, but let your thoughts be known through email, snail-mail, and hit them where it really hurts, their businesses clients. If there's no laws as a deterrent against this horrible behavior, hit them where it'll hurt even more, their wallet and their conscience!

The woman is scum and I hope Google will eternally warn off everyone from dealing with her. OTOH, I find it hard to summon a whole lot of sympathy for a girl that would suicide because her on-line "boyfriend" dumped her. I mean, most of us have survived being dumped by actual live people...

I find it hard to summon a whole lot of sympathy for a girl that would suicide because her on-line "boyfriend" dumped her.

How many times were you dumped by the other person telling you "the world would be a better place without you."

I admit I missed out on the whole teenage romance thing (the adult romance thing too for that matter) but I can't imagine this is the way it usually goes south.

Keep in mind that this was a thirteen year old girl who the woman knew was emotionally unstable. I can't imagine how I would have reacted to something like that at her age, but I have a feeling it would have been pretty spectacularly self destructive.

Hmm, and The Smoking Gun has the police report that Lori Drew filed to document "tension in the neighborhood" once her neighbors found out about her role in Megan's suicide:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/1120072megan1.html

Years ago I read M. Scott Peck's "People of the Lie", which outlined his theory of evil. Some of the cases he described reminded me of this one, and it appears from the absoluately horrific blog that was pointed to above that these scumbags have perfected the art of lying to themselves about their own nature.

I think the issue was that Drew didn't stalk or harass Megan, she tricked her--the suicide was the result of "emotional fraud"

I don't agree with this line of reasoning, although you seem to be in sync with the local authorities who have been "handling" this matter.

Ms. Drew set out to deliberately inflict substantial emotional distress on a child she knew to be emotionally sensitive. She did so in a manner that included sexually charged communications intended to lure the girl into enhanced risk.

That sounds like a willfully harmful act perpetrated across the instrumentalities of interstate commerce (the internet).

There is so much intentional harm here, directed at a minor, that I have a hard time believing it isn't covered by cyberstalking and possibly sexual predation legislation.

Even in negligent acts, the perpetrator "Takes the victim as she is," meaning that a victim's weaknesses do not excuse or mitigate the perpetrator's liability. In this instance, the perpetrator knew precisely what sort of weaknesses this girl had. To me, that raises the level of harm to a criminal one, with intent to seriously injure.

The "real" reason that the perpetrator has not been charged, IMNSHO, is that she was so tightly bound up with the local powers that be that they just swept the matter aside hoping it would just go away. It almost did.

This sounds like an amazingly spot-on civil suit for Intentional Inflistion of Emotional Distress, which could really kill the Drews financially. Even if the Meir's sued for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress, they could make the Drews' lives hell for the next few years. Additionally, it would put all of the facts down in legal public records, open to anyone to view or display, which would make them pariahs in any town in the country. I certainly wouldn't want these people living within a 200-mile radius of my family.
Hopefully her husband is divorcing her and her daughter understands how truly evil her mother's behavior has been.
That's my opinion.

Click to read how FOX TV attacked one blogger for calling for Justice for Megan and is called all bloggers a "CYBER MOB"

http://clearblogs.com/theexposer/84756

Amen to Emily's comment. Don't get mad, get even. Ruin the Drews' lives permanently; litigate until they have no money, no privacy, no joy, no reason to wish to live...until there is NOWHERE they can go where they will not be known for what they are. Perhaps a suitably outraged lawyer will take the case pro bono.

I really dont think that Ashley Grills was to blame! This Megan Meier had serious mental issues! Megan was a bully herself! She received a bit of what she was handing around and couldnt handle it! No-one is to blame but herself.

Post a comment

By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although The Atlantic does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.


Copyright © 2007 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.