Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, shocking - but they may not want to disclose all what has happened?
Not sure why was the delay - when the girl who refused to drink a smoothie got picked up at around midnight - why it took until 3 am to get the rest of the girls out of there?
Why the girl didn’t share that the man was trying to pull one of the sleeping girls upstairs?
She helped her once, but what happened in 3 hours since she left?
Where was his wife?
Because she's 12. She may either had been too embarrassed to say something, or she may not have realized what could have been going on. I agree that 12 year olds these days have more information than I did at 12, but still, she's 12, and no matter how much is shoved down our throats every day, some things don't change - 12 year old girls are not always 'fierce warriors', some of them are very shy about certain things.
I don’t understand why she didn’t confront the accused and didn’t try to wake up and take the other girls with her and her relative who came to pick her up?
Because she was TWELVE.
You can rest assured she asks herself this a dozen times a day and probably will need therapy for many years.
The man screwed her over in more way than one, because now she will never trust men again. Ask me how I know (actually, don't.)
I think you have to teach your kids that if the texts get ignored and its important call. And keep calling until they pick up.
In general, yes. But it sounds like the girl's first priority in this particular case was that she didn't want the man to know that she was awake. She pretended to be asleep when he was in the room and texted when he stepped out. Maybe she was afraid that he would hear her voice if she tried to call and come back into the room for her. She really was in a very difficult position. Given all that was going on, and given her young age, I think she handled herself as well as anyone could expect.
Well I know 2 parents who will be sleeping with their phone right next to them from now on.
I suspect those two parents have a daughter who will never want to go on a sleepover again. Even if she wasn't physically harmed, she's had a piece of her childhood stolen from her, thanks to that disgusting creep.
I’ve been that parent whose 14 yrs old daughter isn’t allowed to have social media nor go to others’ homes for sleepover, and I don’t regret the decision at all. There are things, things concerning a child’s safety/emotional-physical wellbeing, that I absolutely don’t play. Just because things are popular and trendy doesn’t mean we ought to do them.
I’m more than happy to host sleepovers (and we have) and even my husband would not approach the girls out of respect and prudence. Boundaries are the highest form of love.
I’m the type that before we bought a house I would have already found out about the neighborhood crime history and where the registered sex offenders live (if there was any, and trust me they exist even in the very affluent, generally safe neighborhoods. There are white collar, seemingly “successful” perverts like this Dad hiding in plain sight where kids hang out.)-I used familywatchdog.us site and SpotCrime app as my go to check point.
Parents don’t seem to be into sleepovers as much anymore, an exception being supervised church lock-ins, and cases like these will reinforce this trend.
After the police collect their evidence and hand it over to prosecutors, the prosecutors have to build their own case and interview witnesses. THEN they present it to a grand jury. In Oregon, grand juries only meet for one day per week, so it can take time to get all the witnesses in front of the jury. Because grand juries hear multiple cases, weeks may have passed between testimonies.
Typically grand juries only vote (for true bill/no bill) at specified times. For a jury that meets 1x per week, likely the prosecutor waits until the end of the month and then tells the jury which cases they are ready for the jury to vote on. It may have taken several months to get all the testimony presented before the prosecutor decided they were ready to have the jury vote.
Despite the grand jury proceeding the jury only indicted on misdemeanor charges. There's no way for us to know if the prosecutor asked the jury to consider more serious charges but grand juries typically only hear felonies, so it seems likely that the prosecutor did ask them to consider more serious charges. But they only indicted for the misdemeanors related to drugging the girls. That explains the low bail.
If the prosecutor did try for an indictment on more serious charges, but the jury passed, it's still possible for the prosecutor to try again. The current indictment gives them more time, and also more leverage to look for more victims and possibly obtain more search warrants. They can present the case again to another jury and re-introduce the previous testimony (the testimony is transcribed and can be read to a new jury).
If it were me, I'd start with the wife/now ex-wife. It's pretty clear he chose a spouse whose cultural background and language barriers would make it difficult for her to get free of him.
After the police collect their evidence and hand it over to prosecutors, the prosecutors have to build their own case and interview witnesses. THEN they present it to a grand jury. In Oregon, grand juries only meet for one day per week, so it can take time to get all the witnesses in front of the jury. Because grand juries hear multiple cases, weeks may have passed between testimonies.
Typically grand juries only vote (for true bill/no bill) at specified times. For a jury that meets 1x per week, likely the prosecutor waits until the end of the month and then tells the jury which cases they are ready for the jury to vote on. It may have taken several months to get all the testimony presented before the prosecutor decided they were ready to have the jury vote.
Despite the grand jury proceeding the jury only indicted on misdemeanor charges. There's no way for us to know if the prosecutor asked the jury to consider more serious charges but grand juries typically only hear felonies, so it seems likely that the prosecutor did ask them to consider more serious charges. But they only indicted for the misdemeanors related to drugging the girls. That explains the low bail.
If the prosecutor did try for an indictment on more serious charges, but the jury passed, it's still possible for the prosecutor to try again. The current indictment gives them more time, and also more leverage to look for more victims and possibly obtain more search warrants. They can present the case again to another jury and re-introduce the previous testimony (the testimony is transcribed and can be read to a new jury).
If it were me, I'd start with the wife/now ex-wife. It's pretty clear he chose a spouse whose cultural background and language barriers would make it difficult for her to get free of him.
What are you talking about? Are you perhaps thinking of some other case? The grand jury indicted Meyden on SIX felony counts and three misdemeanors.
Here's a direct copy-and-paste of the charges from the Oregon Judicial Dept:
Charges
Meyden, Michael Jay
Description
Statute
Level
Date
1 Causing Another Person to Ingest a Controlled Substance 475.908(1) Felony Class B 08/25/2023
2 Causing Another Person to Ingest a Controlled Substance 475.908(1) Felony Class B 08/25/2023
3 Causing Another Person to Ingest a Controlled Substance 475.908(1) Felony Class B 08/25/2023
4 Apply Sched IV Controlled Substance to Body of Minor 475.910 Felony Class C 08/25/2023
5 Apply Sched IV Controlled Substance to Body of Minor 475.910 Felony Class C 08/25/2023
6 Apply Sched IV Controlled Substance to Body of Minor 475.910 Felony Class C 08/25/2023
7 Delivery to Minor of Controlled Substance Sched IV 475.906(3) Misdemeanor Class A 08/25/2023
8 Delivery to Minor of Controlled Substance Sched IV 475.906(3) Misdemeanor Class A 08/25/2023
9 Delivery to Minor of Controlled Substance Sched IV 475.906(3) Misdemeanor Class A 08/25/2023
As far as the bail, Oregon instituted bail reform legislation several years ago that has produced some...interesting results.
"Start with the wife" about what?
Last edited by Metlakatla; 03-06-2024 at 09:25 PM..
It's pretty clear he chose a spouse whose cultural background and language barriers would make it difficult for her to get free of him.
I was thinking that exact thing. She doesn't speak English well, so in his eyes, she is easy to control.
Just leads to the kind of person he is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
