ARE YOU A CYBERBULLY? - TAKE THE QUIZ

Often our cyberpaths, once found out and/or exposed turn into a cyberbully to silence their victims. We have had threats of lawsuits against victims. (No predator really wants their lies or cover-up exposed!)

Other predators have threatened their victims' families, children, friends, jobs, reputations. Two even started hate sites about their victims, blaming them for everything. Both were even so childish as to think she was US!! (They only see their exposes and not the slew of the rest of them!!)

Our very first exposed predator, Charles 'Ed' Hicks still claims its "all false" and is back online doing the same all over again as well as being WANTED for jumping probation! In fact he tells new potential victims he's suing his ex-wives, Very Bad Men, Dr. Phil and the court system in Virginia for their supposedly false accusations and writing a 'tell-all' book with the 'truth!' LOL. Don't hold your breath, readers.

Of course there's the old "SHE'S JUST A SCORNED WOMAN" or "HE'S A JILTED LOVER" excuses in cyber affairs. Real life affairs use them too when the predator wants to play victim and make everyone feel sorry for him - including new targets. It's a joke. (Our advice? The minute you hear that 'scorned woman' defense? Make it your business to contact this 'scorned woman' or 'jilted man'! Someone with no secrets or destructive agenda wouldn't care if you spoke to their ex! Same applies to women predators.)

So let's find out - did your online love or cyber-friend turn into a cyberbully? Or were they a cyberbully all along?
from: DEATH BY 1000 PAPERCUTS:

Cyber-harassment, cyber-stalking, cyber-group bully, cyber-Gossip: all of these categories fall under the tactics of a cyber-bully.

Here is a quiz, take it and see it you’re a cyber-bully or if you've ever pulled some other cyber-bullying tactics during your time on-line.

Have you ever done this?

1.Signed on with someone else’s nic and password to get information.
While this does not seem like cyber-bullying if this information was to be used for ill-will, then, yes, it is cyber-bullying.

2. Sent an email or online greeting card from someone else’s account.
Again, some may claim that this is not cyber-bullying, if the email or online greeting is used to stalk or harass someone, then it falls under cyber-bullying.

3. Forwarded a private IM or email without permission.
This could be construed as a “grey” area. After all, it’s merely passing on a private email or IM and some would argue as fairly innocuous.

It boils down to intent.

Was the private conversation/email sent to someone or others with the intent to spread gossip or do harm? While most likely the victim may never know their communication has been forwarded to others, this is still harmful to that person. This is not direct cyber-bullying, more like back-stabbing cyber-bullying tactics.

4. Hacked into someone’s PC, website or blog
Not only is this cyber-bullying but also cyber-stalking and illegal. A 33-yr-old man in Florida was just sentenced to prison for 110 years after being convicted of hacking into MySpace teenaged girl’s PC’s. He threatened to harm to them or their families if they didn’t send him lewd photos.

5. Sent a virus or Trojan Horse?
This is malicious behavior with intent to do harm.

6. Posted rude, nasty or vicious (miscontrued) comments about someone online
Back to intent. Some blogs or forums can get heated and contentious but if someone’s intent is to solely post rude, nasty or vicious comments about another poster then this is cyber-bullying and cyber-gossiping.

7. Teased or frightened someone during IM chats
Teasing that goes over the line, that is meant to chip away someone’s self-esteem. The victim cries foul, the perpetrator claims “teasing.” Boo! (Not that kind of fright) Frightening someone can mean making threats to do harm.

8. Joined in a clique on a blog, website or chatroom that enjoyed driving other posters offsite
Not often talked about are the “community” blogs or chatrooms where “like-minded” posters form cliques. Part of their activities are to single out other posters for the sole purpose of driving the target off the site. This is often done in the guise of “for the good of the blog or chatroom.”

9. Accused someone of a crime online without proof
The person who is unfairly accused of committing a crime online usually has nowhere to turn. The accusers are for the most part, anonymous, the “accusation” gets spread without proof.

10. Followed someone across the Web
Kept track of other online posters, following them from blog to blog, chatroom to chatroom, site to stie. This is a form of soft-core Cyber-stalking. Not the same as showing up at their door but enough to creep anyone out. (Cyberpaths do this to see if any of their victims are "talking about them" to anyone else and then raging on as "being the victim" themselves!)

(many of our victims feel that they need to find out if their cyberpath is "doing it again" or "harming anyone else." EOPC does NOT consider that cyberstalking but accountability as well as compulsory in order to stop these predators from throwing one life away to start destroying another)
Did you answer "yes" to any of these?

Only you know the answer to that question. If you did, maybe it was a one-time occurrence. Only you know the answer to that one, too.

If you were guilty of any of these actions, you should think about changing your behavior.

Unless you want to be a cyber-bully.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE FOUND HERE

HOW ONLINE STUPIDITY CAN GET YOU IN BIG BIG TROUBLE!

REVENGE OF THE SPAM
Gregory Steven Hart lives behind black metal gates in a house full of computers, elegant sculptures and expensive liquor that he never drinks.

Three days after Christmas, Deputy Sheriff Russell Hemmendinger hauled Hart to jail. The charges were driving with a suspended license and resisting arrest. The deputy took him down in the driveway of his $367,000 Lutz home, in front of his pregnant wife and neighbors.

Hart posted bail and went home and got to work. Within 24 hours, the first concerned citizen e-mailed the Pasco County Sheriff's Office.

From: tom and ray

To: dtobin@pascosheriff.org

Subject: Is Officer R. Hemmendinger Gay?

Has Officer R. Hemmendinger ever had sex with a boy that's under the age of 16?

*****

Hart is 43, a database developer for a massive health care corporation called Baxter International. He has a clean record, aside from nearly two dozen traffic tickets - mostly for speeding and running red lights - in the past decade. These led to the license suspension, which led Hemmendinger to his doorstep.

Hemmendinger is 31, married, a Pasco deputy for three years. His record is spotless. Citizens have written the agency to commend him for good work.

Hart claims that during the arrest Hemmendinger "started screaming and yelling hysterically at me ... like a lunatic." He returned from jail and began digging. He says his research convinced him that Hemmendinger was a homosexual pedophile.

A reporter pressed him for evidence.

"I can't go into detail," he said.

Did he report the supposed transgression to the Sheriff's Office?

No. He says couldn't trust them to investigate.

Hart had another idea. He has his own software company, Database Engineers, as well as a computer armed with a program called Atomic Mail Sender and a list of addresses known to accept spam.

Hundreds, perhaps thousands of e-mails screamed into cyberspace:

Who is Pasco Sherriff Officer R. Hemmendinger?

How is he a suspect as a child molester?

Is he homosexual?

Does he have sex with boys under the age of 16? Regularly?

Contact the Pasco County Public Information Director ...

Demand to accept ONLY the truth!

*****

One of these e-mails reached Pasco Deputy Eric Pfenninger, who alerted Hemmendinger, who reeled with disbelief. The e-mail led to two sites, Hemmendinger.net and Hemmendinger.org, at least one of which advertised an upcoming gay dating service called Hemmendinger Homosexual Haven.

Hemmendinger plugged the name into an online service that lists the owners of Web domains. The answer came back: Database Engineers Inc. The sole officer was Gregory Hart.

Hemmendinger notified his superiors and denied the allegations. Meanwhile, the Public Information Office took more than a dozen phone calls and nearly 70 e-mails from citizens.

The public-information officers told the citizens it appeared to be the work of a malcontent bent on vengeance. The agency did not conduct an internal-affairs investigation. Public Information Director Kevin Doll said there was no evidence with which to start one.

On Jan. 12, Hemmendinger filed a lawsuit accusing Hart of defaming his good name. The suit is pending in circuit court. Libel experts say Hemmendinger may have a strong case.

Here are two of Hart's defenses:

1. "I haven't made a statement. I asked a question."

Jurors may see through that, said Dale Herbeck, who teaches communication law at Boston College. "This is kind of like asking, 'When did you stop beating your wife?' "

2. He didn't personally send the e-mails - his corporation did.

"Nonsense", said Clark Furlow, who teaches corporation law at Stetson University College of Law.

"If I'm driving a car and I run you down in the street, I'm liable. The fact that I'm driving for a company doesn't change anything."

ORIGINAL

HOW TO HANDLE ONLINE HARASSMENT

FROM WHOA

You must clearly tell the harasser to stop
Generally speaking, it is unwise to communicate with a harasser. However, as soon as you determine that you are truly being harassed by someone, you must very clearly tell that person to stop. Simply say something like "Do not contact me in any way in the future" and leave it there. You do not need to explain why, just state that you do not want the person to contact you. Sometimes it is helpful to copy this message to the abuse department of the harasser's ISP. Keep a record of this message for your records. Do not respond to any further messages of any sort from the harasser. Don't have anyone else contact the harasser on your behalf.

It is common for the harasser to claim that you are harassing or stalking him or her, but if you aren't contacting the person, it is clear that you aren't the harasser.

Save everything
One of the first impulses many harassment victims have is to just delete any communications they've received, and that's a bad idea. It's important to save absolutely every communication you have with the harasser - email, chat logs, ICQ histories, anything. If the harasser has created a web site about you, save copies of it to your local system and have someone you trust who would testify in court for you if necessary to do the same. If you receive any phone calls from the harasser, have them traced immediately (your local phone company can tell you how to do that). If you receive any kind of postal mail or other offline communications, save them (with envelopes, boxes, etc.). Do not destroy any evidence - and do not handle it more than absolutely necessary or permit anyone else to do so. Immediately turn the evidence over to the police. Place envelopes, letters, etc. in plastic bags to protect any possible fingerprints.

Complain to the appropriate parties
It can at times be a little difficult for people to determine who the appropriate party is. If you're harassed in a chat room, contact whoever runs the server you were using. If you're harassed on any kind of instant messaging service, read the terms of service and harassment policies they've provided and use any contact address given there. If someone has created a web site to harass you, complain to the server where the site is hosted. If you're being harassed via email, complain to the sender's ISP and any email service (like Hotmail) used to send the messages. Figuring out who to complain to is one of the areas in which WHOA's volunteers can definitely help you.

Cease & desists also can be sent to them and you can go to the police (and their police) and demand a report be filed on them.

Determine your desired result
What do you want to have happen? You need to think about that. Be realistic. It's reasonable to expect that you can get the harasser to stop contacting you. It is reasonable to expect that you can increase your safety online and offline and that of your family.

It is not realistic to expect an apology from the harasser or any kind of "payback" or revenge. If you want to file a lawsuit because of something the harasser said or you believe they said about you, find a lawyer who will take the suit, but realize that you'll probably have to pay a lot of legal costs and may not ever get any kind of satisfaction.

Take our advice
You have to be willing to take the advice given to you, or you're wasting your time and ours. If we suggest that you change your email address, there's a good reason for it, even if it is a hassle. If we suggest that you not visit a particular chat room again, there's a good reason for it.

MORE AT WHOA

IN REVIEW: October 2008 Internet Harasser of the Month: Gary Stone

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Cyberstalker's Hate Campaign Made Me Live in Terror

A survivor of the July 7 U.K. bombings revealed how she has been subjected to a year-long hate campaign by a "cyberstalker".

Rachel North, 36, who survived the Russell Square Piccadilly line blast which killed 26 people, said she feared for her safety after being bombarded with hundreds of abusive emails.

One accused Miss North, who is leading a campaign pushing for a public inquiry into the London atrocities, of "making a living on the backs of the dead".

Last month, her stalker, Felicity Jane Lowde, 41, who Miss North has never met, was convicted in her absence, of harassment after failing to attend her trial at Stratford Magistrates' Court in East London.

The mother of one is on the run and a warrant has been issued for her arrest.

But despite this, she has continued to subject Miss North, who married last month, to a torrent of warped messages apparently sent from Internet cafes in London.

Last week, Lowde, from Oxford, spent more than an hour firing off a string of messages.

She wrote: "Get lost you justice-perverting bitch.

"You are a warmongering bitch. No one believes you. People hate you for what you've done. Stop trying to promote yourself and go away Rachel.

"Wicked bitch. In your wedding picture you look happy to have got away with it. But time is ticking and you'll wind up in jail with the stupid grin wiped off your evil face."

Another message said: "So happy to grab your man. You're an embarrassment. You have embarrassed all of us.

"Poor deluded sod. I feel sorry for him. Has he any idea what a fool you are making of yourself with your campaigns? You will pay for your actions. You have LIED to us Rachel. LIED."

Miss North survived the 7/7 atrocities three years after she was raped, robbed and left for dead by a stranger who broke into her London flat.

After the terror attacks, she gave up her job in advertising to lead the campaign for a public inquiry.

She described how Lowde began posting abusive comments on her blog in April last year.

Miss North, who has received counselling for post-traumatic stress and survivor guilt, said: "This woman was writing that I should be prosecuted for deserting the dead.

"She asked why I did not stay to help the dying when in fact we had been told to evacuate the carriage.

"At the time I was having nightmares. I would wake up hearing people screaming and think that we had all walked away from the carriage.

"It was relentless psychological warfare. She sent me hundreds of emails and made false accusations about me publicly on her website.

"I have never understood why she has gone for me like this. I find it horrific that a woman could do this to another woman." Miss North said she feared for her safety. " have no idea what she will do next," she added. "I am concerned that she will just turn up at my door.

"I have given her every opportunity to stop. I ignored her at first and then wrote to her asking her to leave me alone. I even offered to have a woman-to-woman chat to her on the phone to sort it out.

"I thought that the trial last month would be the end of it all but now she has gone on the run. I just hope she is caught soon." (note: Lowde was caught and is currently out with a gag-order on her about this case as it is ongoing)

On her internet blog, Lowde - who has a grown-up son - describes herself as a graduate researcher and psychologist.

During the police inquiry, she claimed she was being stalked by Miss North and has vowed to clear her name. (note: THIS IS A TYPICAL PATHOLOGICAL PROJECTION THAT HAS BEEN USED BY OUR EXPOSED CYBERPATHS WHEN THEIR REMORSELESS ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN EXPOSED! Count: Beckstead, Jacoby, YidwithLid, Thomas and others in that "boo-hoo I am the victim here" nonsense Cyberpaths feed to law-enforcement!

Sounds a lot like Ed Hicks' "I am writing a tell-all book to get the TRUTH out there."; O.J. Simpson's "looking for the real killer"; Scott Peterson's "I am innocent - everyone takes a boat out on Christmas Day in freezing cold weather to dump a body"; Yidwithlid's whitewashed version of events; and the other Cyberpaths who write us or have their friends write us threatening us if we 'don't remove the slander' or the Psychopath's whose versions of reality are enough to make your head spin.)

A prosecution source said: "What she has said to Rachel is incomprehensible. It beggars belief that someone could be so cruel."

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

MORE ON FELICITY JANE LOWDE

FELICITY JANE LOWDE'S VERSION & WEBSITE

CyberStalking Case Urges Lawmakers to Make New Laws

By JOSEPH SLACIAN

Emily Jones received a startling call from her pastor in March.

The pastor, who was taking a new position out of state, was adding members of his congregation to his Facebook account to keep in touch with after the move. He found a Facebook page - an Internet socializing network - that purportedly belonged to Jones.

He called her after viewing the page, Jones said, because “he was concerned I had fallen away from my Christian walk.”

The site, in Jones' words, contained “the worst smut, X-rated material you could imagine.”

Ryan Brown, a sound technician at Jones' church, had created Facebook pages for Jones and her younger sister, Haley Flanagan, each containing obscene material about the two of them.

Brown admitted making the pages to Wabash police and was charged with two counts of stalking and two counts of harassment. He plead guilty to the harassment charges on Wednesday in Wabash County Superior Court.

“That's just a slap on the wrist,” the girls' mother, Cindy Flanagan, said of the probable sentence provided for in current law during a Plain Dealer interview before the hearing in Wabash Superior Court. “If he would have to file as an Internet predator or a sex offender, they could take the Internet away from him for two years.”

Jones, married and the mother of two young children, said, “Harassment to me is when someone says, ‘Hey, pretty girl,' and you feel uncomfortable. This is worse than harassment.”

Cindy Flanagan quickly added, “This is molestation.”

But, as the Flanagans and Joneses learned in the six months since the pages were discovered, Indiana doesn't have laws to punish the type of cyber-stalking the two young ladies have been subjected to for two years.

The family, with the help of State Rep. Bill Ruppel, Attorney General Steve Carter, Mayor Bob Vanlandingham and others, are trying to get laws enacted in Indiana against cyber-stalking. They said they are ready to go as far as testifying before the Indiana Legislature to make their case for tougher measures.

“It's not going to help our case currently,” Jones said, “but the next time someone does it, and if they get caught, they could be punished as a sex offender. It definitely is a sex crime.”

Facebook is an Internet social network popular among teens and young adults as a way to interact with people around the world on the computer. (The company closed the fake pages after being notified by authorities.)

Because the site was seen worldwide, the sisters fear for their safety.

The sisters have taken self defense courses, and other measures to protect themselves.

What makes it even more disgusting, Jones said, is to think of the number of men around the world who have conversations over the computer with Brown, thinking they were actually talking to one of the sisters.

“It scares you,” she said. “These people have been having ‘relations' with us for two years. They know where we live. Our safety is definitely a concern.”
Coming forward has taken a lot of courage.

“It's scary to come forward,” Jones said. “But, if someone does it again, we need to have laws in place so they can be punished.”

ORIGINAL

Michigan woman charged with cyber-stalking

Police say messages posted to a blog were threatening, harassing

In an electronic age which makes every text-message, e-mail and blog entry part of cyberspace permanent record, a particularly vicious break-up can lead to criminal charges as well as broken hearts.
Frances Boensch, 28, of Essexville (Michigan), found that out the hard way. After contacting police ...about what she said were threats from a former lover, Michigan State Police launched an investigation that lead to cyber-stalking charges filed against Boensch.

Boensch was free on a $5,000 bond after being arraigned last week in Bay County District Court on a charge of stalking via posting a threatening message on the Internet.

If convicted of the felony, she faces up to two years in prison.

Boensch works at Delta College, teaching her colleagues to avoid sexual harassment.

But police and prosecutors have decided that entries in Boensch's blog, along with content of text messages and e-mails to the alleged victim, amount to Internet stalking.

In 1993, Michigan became the first state to make "electronic stalking" a crime, but Bay County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Nancy Borushko said this is the first case that she personally has been involved in.

"As more people have access to the Internet and get more comfortable online, I think we may see more charges like this," Borushko said. "We're not talking about protected speech here, we're talking about things that make the victim feel terrorized, threatened or molested."

The Times was unable to reach Boensch, of 886 N. York Drive, for comment.

Her defense attorney, Joseph S. Scorsone, said he advises his clients not to make statements while charges are pending, but that he will be prepared to make a statement on her behalf after the preliminary evidence hearing, set for Aug. 12.

The blog - frandazzel.com - has been cleared of the previous content, and the lone page at the address [used to show] a photo of Boensch's face, wearing sunglasses, in a cemetery full of white crosses.

"With much sadness, I have to report that frandazzel has died," the message said. "She was brutally raped and murdered for reasons unknown to us at this time."

The police report prepared by Michigan State Police Trooper Elizabeth Hunt, however, contains copies various blog postings, e-mails and text-messages. A blog - short for Web log - is like an online diary.

Hunt launched an investigation after Boensch, herself, called Delta College police to report that she was being threatened by someone via e-mail who claimed to have semi-nude photos of her that were about to be printed and distributed.

While no criminal charges stemmed from that incident, Hunt spoke to the person identified as the suspect, a former lover of Boensch, who provided additional information about the blog and other communications from Boensch.

"With technology," Borushko said, "things can be saved for a very long time."

Ironically, in literature distributed by Boensch to Delta employees, she urges her colleagues to "record the date and time" of any threatening actions by another and to "save all e-mails, voicemails, and messages that relate to the complaint."
~~~~

What is Internet stalking?

Michigan Compiled Law 750.411s forbids a person from posting a message 'through the use of any medium of communication, including the Internet or a computer, computer program, computer system, or computer network, or other electronic medium of communication, without the victim's consent' if several other factors are present.

Those factors are:

• The poster realizes 'that posting the message could cause two or more separate noncontinuous acts of unconsented contact with the victim.'

• Posting the message is intended to cause conduct that would make the victim feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

• Conduct arising from posting the message would cause a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress and to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

• Conduct arising from posting the message causes the victim to suffer emotional distress and to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

Conviction is punishable by up to two years in prison and $5,000 in fines.

However, if the posting results in a credible threat against the victim, violates probation or a restraining order or if the victim is under 18 and five years younger than the perpetrator, the crime in punishable by up to five years in prison.

The section does not prohibit constitutionally protected speech or activity.

FROM THIS RESOURCE

Man Held his Internet Lover Prisoner when She Tried to End It

[United Kingdom:] Paul Peccioli, 55, "reacted badly" when Julia Pickup, whom he met online, told him she thought they should stop seeing each other, a court heard.

When Miss Pickup, 51, told him that their six-month relationship was over he banged his head against a wall then held up an airgun, telling Miss Pickup he would "deck her if she was a man", Leicester Crown Court was told.

The court heard that over the next few days Peccioli, a former Conservative member of Daventry District Council, slapped Miss Pickup's legs and threatened to take an overdose.

When she tried to go to work one morning, four days after she had ended their relationship, Peccioli blocked her path.

But he allowed her to call in to explain her absence. Two workmates realised something was wrong and went to her home.

When they arrived at the property in Ullesthorpe, Leicestershire, Miss Pickup escaped but Peccioli chased after them in his own car.

Mr Thatcher told the court: "She ran out to the waiting car. When Peccioli realised what was happening he ran out after her, screaming."

Miss Pickup's colleague did not know the village and turned into a cul-de-sac.

Peccioli tried to open the doors of the car, forcing Miss Pickup's colleague to mount the pavement. They managed to drive away, but Peccioli was following at high speeds.

Miss Pickup's colleague drove to the nearest police station where Peccioli was arrested.

He pleaded guilty to putting a person in fear of violence by harassment and blamed his driving on "emotional upset".

The couple met via the internet in March last year, but Miss Pickup ended the relationship in September after Peccioli became "possessive and overbearing".

Peccioli was given a 12-month suspended prison sentence and a restraining order that prevents him from going within 50 metres of Miss Pickup's home or contacting her.

Judge Michael Pert QC said: "I am prepared to accept that at this late stage of your life you have made a fool of yourself rather than being an inherently dangerous person.

"But that is of little consolation to your victim, and I have to take steps to protect her. Your behaviour during this incident was disgraceful."

READ THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE

Please contact the ORIGINAL writer and source of this article if you have any problems, or corrections.

LORI DREW- Predator? or Martyred by the Internet?

Friend of EOPC, Danny Vice - had such a great post yesterday - we are posting the text part of it here. Every one of our victims will be able to relate to Lori Drew's rewriting & outright denial of history.

Our comments throughout and at the end. In purple. - Fighter

Lori Drew - We Don't Believe You
There are times in a handful of cases when the needle on the B.S. meter stands straight up. When attorneys or officials in a case go so far in their rhetoric, you simply have to begin calling them out on their nonsense. The case of Megan Meier, the 13 year old teen who committed suicide after she was lured into a downward spiral, has reached such level.

We have a county prosecutor and a defense attorney who have gone on the record with statements that flat out rewrite history and previous statements. This flat out stinks of corruption that's increasingly becoming on par with the Duke Lacrosse Player's scandal. (Or Natalee Holloway. Or Laci Peterson. Or Drew Peterson. The list is endless)

If we were to believe that the statements Lori Drew is now making are truthful, and the police report she filed (click here for original) in Nov. 2006 is now incorrect, then why shouldn't Lori Drew should be prosecuted for filing a false police report or charged with making a false statement? Why is she not being charged for obstruction of justice?

Lori Drew, through her attorney Jim Briscoe has made the following statements:

"Everything, as far as Mrs. Drew knew, was that all the communication was nice and polite and there was no harassing going on. She did not create the MySpace account. She did not instruct anybody to create the MySpace account. She never made any communications through the MySpace account."

"She knew these girls were doing it and she didn't stop it. She wishes she did. If she could turn back the clock, that's the part she would do differently."

-told to TODAY's Matt Lauer (CLICK HERE FOR VIDEO)

Well alright Lori - now that you've completely absolved yourself from the case in any way, shape or form, please explain how this squares with your previous statements. Why has your statement changed from when you were on the attack against the Meier family instead of defending yourself.

See, now everyone else is to blame besides you. The officer who took your statement is a liar. (Edwin Lutz) Your daughter is to blame. (Sarah Drew) Your employee is to blame. (Ashley Grills) The Meier family is to blame. Yes Lori, everyone is to blame besides you.
We have a long memory Ms. Drew. We aren't fools. We understand why your statements were different when you were attacking the Meier family. We understand why you now wish to play the victim.

But when it all comes down to it, we simply don't believe you. We'll take the officer's account of what you said above what your attorney says. He was not being paid to defend you and/or boost your public perception standings.

Jack Banas, we are calling for charges in this case one way or another.

Either the women did stalk this child, or she made knowingly false statements to the police prior to the surfacing of this report.

You cannot absolve this woman of complete wrong doing on both sides of the fence. Pick a side or step down and let someone take over who can. Too many admissions have been publicly made for you to continue to hide under your desk.

ORIGINAL & MORE GREAT POSTS! Click Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The debate over the fate of Lori Drew and getting justice for Megan Meier rages on. Bloggers have taken up the cause, despite what media apologists like Fox and others does to us or other bloggers. Calling us a "cyber mob" or "vigilantes" in order to shame us to stop calling for appropriate law enforcement response instead of the "gee, we hope this goes away" rhetoric we have been getting isn't going to work.

As Sarah Wells said so brilliantly:

Vigilantism is one thing, the legal expression of the conscience of the community is another.

By the way, Wells is blamed by media for "outing" Lori Drew by name. Click here for her excellent response to that charge.

In reference to one of our earlier posts "DO THEY EVER ADMIT THEY LIED OR TWISTED THE FACTS?" now add Lori Drew & company as predators who did this.

Doesn't it sound like a whole pile of blame shifting?

Also sounds like the Drews' were attempting to do this:

People who are engaged in defending their internal grandiosity may become adept at giving ostensible apologies that self-justifications. Narcissistically driven people do not seem to understand that saying expression of empathy with the injured party irrespective of whether the hurt was intentional or avoidable.

A related substitute for apologizing is the practice of explaining. Unless the listener is particularly sensitive, an explanation can sound remarkably like an apology.

SOURCE

Compare Drew's words & behavior to our other predators or perps. Please. In the right hand margin we have a whole list. Some are just one post, some are spread thru a certain month so scroll from the bottom of the link you click on & read them all.Then make up your own mind

Was that note she wrote the Meiers an apology by Lori Drew? Of any sort? Sounds like the cyberpath's favorite: HOW TO NOT APOLOGIZE WHEN YOU HAVE SERIOUSLY F**KED UP.

Many people are saying Mrs. Drew is a sociopath or at the least a destructive narcissist. (two incurable personality disorders along the same spectrum) We aren't doctors. But we can find some of the criteria out there for identifying someone with Destructive Narcissistic Pattern (from Joann Ashmun):

Narcissists lack a mature conscience and seem to be restrained only by fear of being punished or of damaging their reputations -- though, again, this can be obscure to casual observation if you don't know what they think their reputations are, and what they believe others think of them may be way out of touch with reality. Their moral intelligence is about at the level of a bright five- or six-year-old; the only rules they recognize are things that have been specifically required, permitted, prohibited, or disapproved of by authority figures they know personally. Anyhow, narcissists can't be counted on not to do something just because it's wrong, illegal, or will hurt someone, as long as they think that they can get away with it or that you can't stop them or punish them (i.e., they don't care what you think unless they're afraid of you).

-- If you're like me, you get into disputes with narcissists over their casual dishonesty and cruelty to other people

Trying to reform narcissists by reasoning with them or by appealing to their better nature is about as effective as spitting in the ocean. What you see is what you get: they have no better nature. The fundamental problem here is that narcissists lack empathy.

-- Lacking empathy is a profound disturbance to the narcissist's thinking (cognition) and feeling (affectivity). Even when very intelligent, narcissists can't reason well. One I've worked with closely does something I characterize as "analysis by eggbeater." They don't understand the meaning of what people say and they don't grasp the meaning of the written word either -- because so much of the meaning of anything we say depends on context and affect, narcissists (lacking empathy and thus lacking both context and affect) hear only the words. (Discussions with narcissists can be really weird and disconcerting; they seem to think that using some of the same words means that they are following a line of conversation or reasoning. Thus, they will go off on tangents and irrelevancies, apparently in the blithe delusion that they understand what others are talking about.) And, frankly, they don't hear all the words, either. They can pay attention only to stuff that has them in it. This is not merely a bad habit -- it's a cognitive deficiency. Narcissists pay attention only to themselves and stuff that affects them personally. However, since they don't know what other people are doing, narcissists can't judge what will affect them personally and seem never to learn that when they cause trouble they will get trouble back. They won't take other people's feelings into consideration and so they overlook the fact that other people will react with feeling when abused or exploited and that most people get really pissed off by being lied to or lied about.

-- Narcissists are (a) extremely sensitive to personal criticism and (b) extremely critical of other people.

They see themselves as perfect or superior or infallible, next to god-like (if not actually divine, then sitting on the right hand of God) -- or else they are worthless. There's no middle ground of ordinary normal humanity for narcissists. They can't tolerate the least disagreement. In fact, if you say, "Please don't do that again -- it hurts," narcissists will turn around and do it again harder to prove that they were right the first time; their reasoning seems to be something like "I am a good person and can do no wrong; therefore, I didn't hurt you and you are lying about it now..." -- sorry, folks, I get lost after that. Anyhow, narcissists are habitually cruel in little ways, as well as big ones, because they're paying attention to their fantasy and not to you, but the bruises on you are REAL, not in your imagination. Thus, no matter how gently you suggest that they might do better to change their ways or get some help, they will react in one of two equally horrible ways: they will attack or they will withdraw. Be wary of wandering into this dragon's cave -- narcissists will say ANYTHING, they will trash anyone in their own self-justification, and then they will expect the immediate restoration of the status quo. They will attack you (sometimes physically) and spew a load of bile, insult, abuse, contempt, threats, etc., and then -- well, it's kind of like they had indigestion and the vicious tirade worked like a burp: "There. Now I feel better. Where were we?" They feel better, so they expect you to feel better, too. They will say you are nothing, worthless, and turn around immediately and say that they love you. When you object to this kind of treatment, they will say, "You just have to accept me the way I am. (God made me this way, so God loves me even if you are too stupid to understand how special I am.)" Accepting them as they are (and staying away from them entirely) is excellent advice.... They can't see that they have a problem; it's always somebody else who has the problem and needs to change. Therapies work at all only when the individual wants to change and, though narcissists hate their real selves, they don't want to change -- they want the world to change. And they criticize, gripe, and complain about almost everything and almost everyone almost all the time. There are usually a favored few whom narcissists regard as absolutely above reproach, even for egregious misconduct or actual crime, and about whom they won't brook the slightest criticism. These are people the narcissists are terrified of, though they'll tell you that what they feel is love and respect; apparently they don't know the difference between fear and love.

Narcissists feel entitled to whatever they can take. They expect privileges and indulgences, and they also feel entitled to exploit other people without any trace of reciprocation.

More on DEFLECTING BLAME (click here to read)

One more:

Narcissists almost make a career out of being victims.

So perhaps the Drews do have a fulfilling life ahead them. Because Megan Meier doesn't.

Briscoe's latest statment from Lori Drew? Sounds like ALL of our cyberpaths!! damaging their reputation! You mean: their fabricated reputation which everyone sees through now. Didn't Mrs. Drew admit in her statement to police -- to helping her daughter create the Josh Evans MySpace account and that mean things were said? Now, all of suddent, her lawyer says she didn't? Are we missing something here? Danny, looks like you caught it too. Sounds like THIS (click here)

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...

EOPC continues to urge or readers to CLICK HERE (scroll to the bottom of this post for the pertinent address & email information) and please continue writing the legal authorities to reopen this case and DO THE RIGHT THING for Megan and her grieving family. If the media and is continuing to defend Mrs. Drew & the law continue ducking any responsibility, its the least we can do for the Meier family.

Write Jack Banas and ask the questions Danny asked in his post. Find out if he EVER talked to the Meier family, because it seems he only spoke to the Drews. His latest nonsense was:

"The actions of the Drews and Grills are not criminal under existing state law, Banas said, because their intent was never to harm, stalk, endanger or harass.

"They did it so they could find out what Megan was saying about Mrs. Drew’s daughter," Banas said. "That is undisputed.

"The only purpose was to find out what one little girl was saying about another little girl" .

You, the concern citizens, can write this prosecutor here:

Jack Banas, Prosecuting Attorney (who refuses to file charges or talk to the Meier famiy directly!)
Courts Administration Building
Room 601
300 North Second Street
St. Charles, MO 63301

Here's an example taken from Sarah Wells' blog by a concerned and reasonable responder, if you have problems composing your own letter - it might read something like this. Its 1 piece of paper, 1 envelope and 1 stamp. Megan was worth at least that.

And the Meier family has continued to ask people to write their lawmakers and those in MO to pressure them to reopen this case and press charges. So here's just one example:

Dear Mr. Banas,

I am a concerned mother pleading that you be accountable and responsive to the citizens of St. Charles County in the case of Megan Meier. I believe you have been merely thinking inside the box in this clearly criminal case. The fact that the unnamed neighbor emerges from this tragedy with no charges against her is appalling.

She broke no laws, you say? How about:

Criminal harassment
Distribution of harmful material to minors
Child endangerment
Violation of the Communications Decency Act of 1996
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

It doesn’t take much imagination to think of charges.

Are you worried about your stats? The citizenry will think more of you if you seek justice. To emotionally prey upon an innocent and fragile young girl is evil, and the perpetrator must be held accountable.

In the last hours before Megan hanged herself, Drew said: "Everybody in O'Fallon knows how you are. You are a bad person and everybody hates you. Have a shitty rest of your life. The world would be a better place without you". How can anyone read these words and deny they contributed greatly to Megan’s death?

We are watching. We are waiting. We are voting. We will not forget your handling of this case. You have the opportunity to acquit yourself in the court of public opinion. Do the right thing!

If you insist on ignoring criminal cases, may I suggest that of damages to a certain foosball table? Or the criminal charge concerning damages to a lawn? Both property damage charges made by the Drews against the Meiers! I’m sure your constituents wouldn’t mind if you dismissed those charges.

Thank you,

(btw - that doesn't sound like the member of a mob, does it?)

And you voters in MO? Vote Banas out during the next upcoming election. This could be your child or you we are fighting for next. - "Fighter"

For DBKP's latest on the "MeganHadItComing" blog- click here

DBKP - The Increasing Victimization of Lori Drew