Comments on: Family Scorned For MySpace Hoax

Angry Neighbors Blame Mom, Son For Suicide Of 13-Year-Old Girl

[reginaregina]

SamtheTVcat,

If you were indeed an attorney, you would know that the burden of proof is on the prosecution...not the defense. It is not necessary to come up with a defense to something that does not constitute a crime. Sometimes the best defense is to remain silent and request a dismissal. In no way can a case be made such as what you stated. The woman had no knowledge of any negative remarks to Megan until AFTER she killed herself. Until that time, all she was aware of was that the "Josh" account existed, that it was set up by someone outside the family to monitor what Megan was saying about her daughter. Every single comment made by the Josh account to Megan was positive, up until that last day (when the account was accessed by someone else altogether, who is the one who made the hurtful comments.) Mrs. Drew didn''t DO *anything* to Megan. There is nothing for which to prosecute her.

Megan''s parents were responsible for providing appropriate care and guidance Megan''s psychological disorder, such as learning how to deal with the fact that there ARE unkind people in the world who WILL say unkind things. They failed. It''s that simple.

[barbaraf4]

"Yes, Star Trek or one of its spinoffs is still on the air. Only reruns now as Enterprise (with Scott Bacula) was the last. I haven''''t been to a scifi convention since 1995." Posted by Klingon69
~~~~~~~~~~~
Original Star Trek and STTNG both rerun here in Tennessee on Charter.

[samthetvcat]

"Our ADD son is about 5 years behind in maturity. Its an ADD thing, perhaps this child experienced the same thing and processed the event more personally, had less emotional coping skills. Very sad."

Posted by facts6

I''ve got ADHD and like with all children, it''s on the parents to teach their child coping mechanisms. If your child is emotionally behind have you tried to get coaching feedback on how to bring him/her up to speed if you haven''t been able to do it on your own?

Megan''s mom was less than perfect (allowing Megan to have a myspace, allowing her to converse with a stranger who was offering questionable flattery which was having an intense effect on her, not sensing the red flag that should have gone up when the ''boy''s'' tone changed on a dime and when he mentioned Megan''s mistreatment of friends, not offering Megan perspective and being able to sooth her feelings, etc), but that doesn''t negate what the Drew woman did to Megan.

[facts6]

Our ADD son is about 5 years behind in maturity. Its an ADD thing, perhaps this child experienced the same thing and processed the event more personally, had less emotional coping skills. Very sad.

[samthetvcat]

"That''s not how it works..."
Posted by ReginaRegina

Sigh, I asked you to cite specific case law because I already said a case could be made for involuntary manslaughter, which is statutory law. If you were knowledgeable in the law, you would already know the elements a prosecutor is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury of the accuseds'' peers.

In previous posts, I laid out my case for establishing the intent element (knowledge of the girls'' infirmities, the age differential, telling Megan that the world would be better off without her). I also pointed out that incitement to commit criminal acts (whereas suicide is a criminal act) is excluded from 1A.

The burden would be on you to defend who you believe to be innocent...if your only defense is ignorance of the law, you ought to already know that ignorance is not a defense if you knew what you were talking about.

Either argue intent, or come up with another defense such as causation, but if you don''t understand the law except as how it''s been explained on tv then maybe you should go to law school first before you try explaining to a lawyer how the law works.

[amazedd]

ReginaRagina, Have you considered updating your wardrobe? For Xmas bellbottoms, like.

[reginaregina]

Okay, everyone.....

Toolmanger called me ugly on the Internet. If I go kill myself over it, is he guilty of killing me?

[toolmangler-2009]

Posted by ReginaRegina at 06:29 PM : Dec 07, 2007



You are right in what you say, Sam doesn''t understand what needs to happen for this to be a crime. If the drews had coaxed someone into killing the girl by accident It would have been "Accidental Homicide" The Jury or Judge would have to decide if they got any ''time'' out of it. But because there was no secondary parties involved, there was no crime. If they had caused her death by telling her to drink ''acid'' to cure hiccups then they would be guilty of some form of homicide. If I tell you that you are so ''ugly'' that they should pass a law against you, I have sinned but not committed a crime.

[amazedd]

What goes ''round, comes around.

[reginaregina]

Can you site some case law to substantiate your claim please? Thx

Posted by SamTheTVCat at 06:52 PM : Dec 07, 2007
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That''s not how it works. Laws are not written that way. If we required specific laws to specifically list every single thing that is NOT illegal, nothing else could ever get done. Laws are written to specify what IS illegal....not what is NOT illegal. Can you CITE some case law that says it IS illegal to tell someone the world would be better off without them? In other words, what law says it is illegal for one child to say mean things to another?