Tuesday, November 20, 2007
The Smoking Gun has It -
A full copy of the police report screencap (shown in a post below) that names Lori Drew, and contains an narrative of her statements.
She is apparently aggrieved that her neighbors are "hostile" and wishes to gain a hearing and/or absolution from the Meiers. She tried three times. On the Thanksgiving weekend just following Megans death. By banging on the door.
After being asked to leave. So she called the police. Lori did.
She is apparently aggrieved that her neighbors are "hostile" and wishes to gain a hearing and/or absolution from the Meiers. She tried three times. On the Thanksgiving weekend just following Megans death. By banging on the door.
After being asked to leave. So she called the police. Lori did.
Comments:
<< Home
Sarah - You have done a real public service here, I think. I imagine that many are writing to criticize you. Ignore them. Just don't go over the edge in reponse!) As they say, sunlight is the best disinfectant. The Drews benefited by no one naming names as all the rest of the neighbors on that street & in that neighborhood were considered "possible suspects" by others in the area. That was certainly unfair to them (the other naeighbors).
Sarah,
Just curious, do you have any sort of way to contact the parents? Assuming they are seeking any sort of legal recourse, I wish they could be made aware of a law that got passed a while ago. At the time, I thought it was excessively stupid, but here's part of it:
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
Just a starting point.
http://www.news.com/Create-an-e-annoyance,-go-to-jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html
Just curious, do you have any sort of way to contact the parents? Assuming they are seeking any sort of legal recourse, I wish they could be made aware of a law that got passed a while ago. At the time, I thought it was excessively stupid, but here's part of it:
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
Just a starting point.
http://www.news.com/Create-an-e-annoyance,-go-to-jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html
Sarah,
What you did was very courageous and had to be done.
What the Drew woman did was monstrous and, let's face it, the newspaper probably made the decision to not publish her name so as to avoid possible litigation. But slander only applies to reported untruths. I believe if the local authorities had at the very least went through the motions of seeking justice for this completely avoidable tragedy, none of this would have happened.
You are now officially a Difference-Maker. There aren't very many people like you out there but thank goodness you exist. :)
What you did was very courageous and had to be done.
What the Drew woman did was monstrous and, let's face it, the newspaper probably made the decision to not publish her name so as to avoid possible litigation. But slander only applies to reported untruths. I believe if the local authorities had at the very least went through the motions of seeking justice for this completely avoidable tragedy, none of this would have happened.
You are now officially a Difference-Maker. There aren't very many people like you out there but thank goodness you exist. :)
I just heard you on "Talk of the Nation." Thank you for presenting the outrage that many of us feel.
I first read Lori Drew's name on another website that may or may not have gotten that information from you (the website is www.jezebel.com, and my hunch is that they found the information elsewhere), so you were not the only one to expose Lori Drew in an attempt to shun and shame her.
Thank you for speaking up and for doing it eloquently.
I first read Lori Drew's name on another website that may or may not have gotten that information from you (the website is www.jezebel.com, and my hunch is that they found the information elsewhere), so you were not the only one to expose Lori Drew in an attempt to shun and shame her.
Thank you for speaking up and for doing it eloquently.
Sarah,
Heard you on NPR today. I see some similarities between your actions and Lori Drew's. Both are passive-aggressive, both intend to personally punish, and both ignore the possible harm to innocent people that might reasonably be expected to result from their actions. You might be getting a lot of pats on the back from other vigilantes, but I don't think what you did can be legitimately called a public service. In any case, I do hope it wasn't the only action you took in order to right a wrong.
There are many positive ways to help further justice. One can contact law makers, county prosecutors, or other officials to suggest better laws, regulations, or enforcement actions to prevent similar events. One could contribute to, or organize, a memorial fund for victims of suicide. One could volunteer at local schools, churches, or clubs to help educate children and parents about the risks of on-line social contacts.
Though, in a way, I do admire your boldness, I don't see any altruism in your publicizing Lori Drew's name. I hope you will reconsider the wisdom of your decision and repudiate it for the public good.
Dan Keeton
Portland, Oregon
Heard you on NPR today. I see some similarities between your actions and Lori Drew's. Both are passive-aggressive, both intend to personally punish, and both ignore the possible harm to innocent people that might reasonably be expected to result from their actions. You might be getting a lot of pats on the back from other vigilantes, but I don't think what you did can be legitimately called a public service. In any case, I do hope it wasn't the only action you took in order to right a wrong.
There are many positive ways to help further justice. One can contact law makers, county prosecutors, or other officials to suggest better laws, regulations, or enforcement actions to prevent similar events. One could contribute to, or organize, a memorial fund for victims of suicide. One could volunteer at local schools, churches, or clubs to help educate children and parents about the risks of on-line social contacts.
Though, in a way, I do admire your boldness, I don't see any altruism in your publicizing Lori Drew's name. I hope you will reconsider the wisdom of your decision and repudiate it for the public good.
Dan Keeton
Portland, Oregon
Sarah,
Heard the last snip of you on NPR today. Good job!
What I would have liked NPR to address is if the traditional media makes it more tantalizing by not naming names. For example, if the Journal would have just said "the neighbor, Lori Drew, blah blah blah" would we have not been so enticed to find out more about this woman than when they say "we will not reveal her name".
It's almost as if they make "naming" enticing.
Heard the last snip of you on NPR today. Good job!
What I would have liked NPR to address is if the traditional media makes it more tantalizing by not naming names. For example, if the Journal would have just said "the neighbor, Lori Drew, blah blah blah" would we have not been so enticed to find out more about this woman than when they say "we will not reveal her name".
It's almost as if they make "naming" enticing.
Dan Keeton,
As a local in the Meier/Drew story I think you are missing some of the outrage here. We pick up the paper, we read about an outrageous act by an adult on a child. THEN, we read that the paper will not publish the name of the child. What?!
To many of us, this seemed like protection of the culprit.
I don't agree with anyone taking the law into their own hands. However, people here have been activited. They are putting pressure on the Drew's business contacts (she owns an advertising publication).
To hold Sarah responsible for someone throwing a rock through a window or any other actions is misguided. It is akin to blaming the phone company for printing names and addresses of single women who become victims of attacks. Sarah was just one of the first of many to "out" Lori Drew.
In fact, the Post-Dispatch (the major paper in town) used Lori Drew's name within a few days.
As a local in the Meier/Drew story I think you are missing some of the outrage here. We pick up the paper, we read about an outrageous act by an adult on a child. THEN, we read that the paper will not publish the name of the child. What?!
To many of us, this seemed like protection of the culprit.
I don't agree with anyone taking the law into their own hands. However, people here have been activited. They are putting pressure on the Drew's business contacts (she owns an advertising publication).
To hold Sarah responsible for someone throwing a rock through a window or any other actions is misguided. It is akin to blaming the phone company for printing names and addresses of single women who become victims of attacks. Sarah was just one of the first of many to "out" Lori Drew.
In fact, the Post-Dispatch (the major paper in town) used Lori Drew's name within a few days.
Suzyjax,
Of course you are outraged by Drew's actions. What she did was reckless, cruel, bizarre, and probably exceeds some significant clinical threshold for antisocial behavior--if not simple insanity.
That said, why the vendetta against her and her family's business? Why attack her livelihood? Who is that helping?
Organizing to help the victims would be a noble endeavor. Why not raise money to help the deceased girl's family hire a lawyer and sue ? At least that would give the profits of the perpetrator's business to the people who were really harmed. Organizing to destroy those assets and make a stony person's life more miserable seems pretty empty and a more than a little scary.
The whole reason we have a civil and criminal justice system is so people don't have to rely on the mob to dispense justice. Vengeance is not the right of an individual nor a group of individuals--no matter how outraged they feel. We're trying to have a civilization here! What you're advocating for is immoral. It might feel good, but it is wrong.
Organized hatred isn't going to help the dead girl's family. There are some useful, even beautiful, things you all could be doing. Think about that a little.
Dan Keeton
Portland, Oregon
Of course you are outraged by Drew's actions. What she did was reckless, cruel, bizarre, and probably exceeds some significant clinical threshold for antisocial behavior--if not simple insanity.
That said, why the vendetta against her and her family's business? Why attack her livelihood? Who is that helping?
Organizing to help the victims would be a noble endeavor. Why not raise money to help the deceased girl's family hire a lawyer and sue ? At least that would give the profits of the perpetrator's business to the people who were really harmed. Organizing to destroy those assets and make a stony person's life more miserable seems pretty empty and a more than a little scary.
The whole reason we have a civil and criminal justice system is so people don't have to rely on the mob to dispense justice. Vengeance is not the right of an individual nor a group of individuals--no matter how outraged they feel. We're trying to have a civilization here! What you're advocating for is immoral. It might feel good, but it is wrong.
Organized hatred isn't going to help the dead girl's family. There are some useful, even beautiful, things you all could be doing. Think about that a little.
Dan Keeton
Portland, Oregon
Read here how Fox TV attacked on blogger today, trying to call her a CYBERBULLY for calling for Justice for Megan Meier and accountability for Lori Drew.
They said all of us were a CYBER MOB.
http://clearblogs.com/theexposer/84756
Post a Comment
They said all of us were a CYBER MOB.
http://clearblogs.com/theexposer/84756
<< Home
