The Shoat Statements

Random musings by the multiple voices inside my head.

I’m not going to start on a vilification campaign against social networking sites such as Facebook or MySpace, because that’s not what this post is about. It’s about two separate incidents, separated by thousands of miles, both encapsulating why people should earn a license to have children.

True Story No. 1 – Missouri, U.S.A

Tina & Ron have a daughter, Megan, who was described by friends as ‘bubbly, goofy, and chubby’. At 13, she opened a MySpace account (officially, you need to be over 14 to register) with the full knowledge, monitoring and consent of her parents. She also has a female friend X. She eventually has a falling out with X. X’s mother and X, along with another as yet unnamed, unaged person opens another MySpace account, as a fictional boy Josh Evans, who then proceeds to become friends with Megan. Friends possibly became a bit more than friends, before fictional Josh Evans broke off with her, claiming that Megan did not ‘treat her friends properly’. Megan Meier hanged herself hours after ringing her mother in tears to say a group of users on MySpace were sending her abusive messages and posting public bulletins calling her "fat" and "a slut".


A sample of the comments posted about this 13 year old:

“Megan Meier is a slut. Megan Meier is fat.”

"Everybody in O'Fallon (Missouri) knows how you are. You are a bad person and everybody hates you. Have a sh--ty rest of your life. The world would be a better place without you."

The creators of the fake Josh account (X and her mother), refuse to apologize to the family, and claim that they were trying to gain Megan’s confidence to see what she was saying about X.

Full story available at http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/21882976/


True Story No. 2 - Kolkata, India

Afazuddin Ali, 36, a daily wage labourer, has appeared before court. Why? Because villagers in West Bengal complained that he had confessed to marrying his daughter, who is now pregnant, six months ago. Worse still, no one in the family had complained about it. The girl’s age is also in question, and medical tests are underway to determine it. She’s never even been to school. Police are in the process of filing the correct charges against him. The man, incredibly, is not remorseful, and instead was quoted as saying:
"I have not committed any crime, don't you see it was God's will,".


Full story available at http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071120/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_india_marriage


************************

Why are parents like this allowed to have children at all? Megan’s parents may have made a mistake in letting her open a MySpace account, but that is nothing when compared to the mother of X. Which parent in their right mind would initiate and encourage their child in such a vile, deceptive campaign against another person? How do you post such abusive remarks at a kid - a 13 year old girl, who was known to have trouble with her weight? Isn't that just plain cruel? With that kind of guidance, can you imagine what the kid will grow up into?

As for that man in India – I don’t know what to say. He’s just 36, so can you imagine how young his daughter was? And she’s pregnant!!!!!!! What I want to know is which idiot married them off? A priest so blind that he couldn’t see the girl’s youth? What is this world coming to?

Children do not ask to be born into this world – we, for our selfish reasons, decide to have kids. Why should they then have to suffer for the obvious ineptitude of these parents? Stories such as the above (and there are a gazillion others like it) only reinforces the point that we humans are not capable of the seemingly simple task of bringing up our young. I mean (the occasional cats aside), do you see a lioness eat her cub? An elephant rape its young? A pack of dogs hound a puppy? Nooooooooo…animals are so much better behaved than us, and moreover, they make the better parent.

Having children should be regulated, like getting a drivers license - or better still, a pilot’s license. Strong, strict tests and courses and exams. Only the very brave, and the very able would pass such a test, and be thus allowed to have children. Not only would that control the burgeoning population, it would also mean better parents and thus better children. It's glaringly obvious that we need some kind of control on who is allowed to become parents.

We already do it for people who want to adopt - it shouldn't be too great a leap to have more stringent mechanisms for all wannabe parents.

3 comments:

Ms. Drew played directly on the sensitivities she knew would cause maximum damage to the Megan. Ms. Drew lured Megan in a way she knew would be most devastating to the child.

This wicked MOA Drew used is the exact methodology that a child predator employs to bait, lure and reel a child victim into doing their will. Child grooming was utilized over weeks and weeks to gain the child's trust... and once trust was obtained, she exploited it into a relationship. (Another Child Predator Hallmark).

When Ms. Drew saw her bullets were hitting it's mark, she turned up the heat. She invited others to partake in the sick, twisted mental assault on this child, keeping the pressure up. Even her business employee joined in the game.

Ms. Drew then delivered the final blow that many depressed 13 year old girls would crumble under.

She mentally raped the child and left her for dead. Better said, encouraged her for dead.

Ms. Drew remains smug and defiant about her actions - even seeks to attack this grieving family while their beloved daughter's memory is fresh in their mind.

She has committed the unthinkable.... and doesn't even acknowledge she abused this child.

Child Predators go to jail for their actions. Physical contact is not required for a conviction. Evidence of any kind of sexually charged grooming of a child by an adult is worthy of a charge of indecent liberties with a child.... or at the very least harassment.

If even assisted suicide is criminal intent, driving someone to it should at least qualify as something more heinous than an ordinary parking ticket.

Danny Vice
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com/

Thank you Danny, for expressing the case better than I possibly could have.

You hit the bulls eye - Ms. Drew acted exactly like a child predator, and should be punished as such. Her lack of remorse is almost as shocking.

I hope you guys keep up the pressure, and lets all hope that Ms. Drew will be brought to justice.

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

About Me

My photo
Be true to your heart, and true to your conscience.

Blog Archive

Stat Counter


View My Stats

World Top Blogs

World Top Blogs - Blog TopSites

Technorati