So, 16 year old Rachelle Waterman had a difficult life of shopping, working a $10/hr computer job, eating vodka soaked fruit, volleyball, honor roll and choir practice. No, really, her mom (who spent a lot of time doing vounteer work with children and was allegedly beloved in the community of Craig, AK) wanted to send her to fat camp. So, naturally, Rachelle enlisted the help of two 24 year old ex-boyfriends and had her murdered. Oh, yes, you budding MeFi detectives, it's all too real. And what was the final entry of our young ringleader whose Live Journal is aptly titled My Crappy Life? before the police seized her computer?
Just to let everyone know, my mother was murdered
I won't have computer acess (sic) until the weekend or so because the police took my computer to go through the hard drive. I thank everyone for their thoughts and e-mails, I hope to talk to you when I get my computer back.
(alaska is 'ak', alabama is 'al')
Posted on November 27, 2004 2:37 PM
Sad thing is, this will go on into the annals of livejournal legends.
Posted on November 27, 2004 6:22 PM
Man, I wish I still lived in Anchorage.. this could go on into the annals of Anchorage legends too.
Posted on November 27, 2004 8:50 PM
It's AK for Alaska.
and don't compare this to Heavenly Creatures. She was not a Heavenly Creature, and she didn't even kill her mom herself. This is more like the Pamela Smart case in NH where the bitch enlisted two flunkies to kill her husband.
Posted on November 27, 2004 9:03 PM
Sigh, in addition to using LiveJournal, this depraved young woman was also a television watcher and a telephone. But the news reports don't mention those facts. It's good that we can focus on the real evil here: The INTERNET.
Posted on November 27, 2004 9:05 PM
this sickely scenario reminds me of the last king of internet retards ripper aka brandon vedas
at least he had the good sense only to kill himself and not his parents
Posted on November 28, 2004 12:45 AM
i'd just like to point out that in this picture (taken from the trip she went on while her mother was being killed, mind you): http://www.ccsd.k12.ak.us/chs/pages/ACDC03/images/2004%20pics/Rachellestudy2.jpg
the character on the shirt she's wearing is a comic book character known as "johnny the homicidal maniac."
Posted on November 28, 2004 4:30 AM
anil: Well, I don't see any "the Internet is evil!" threads here - not like anyone has said that it was the EVIL INTERNET that let her arrange all of this. It's just that the internet (ie. LJ and news sites) is a convenient place to find public, semi-permanent traces of this spectacle.
gray: Umm. I'm wearing that same shirt right now. It's a good, angsty comic if you're not already mentally unbalanced.
Posted on November 28, 2004 7:52 AM
That is seriously messed up. I wonder what LJ is going to do to her account, since it's probably evidence.
Posted on November 28, 2004 8:04 AM
Her dad was also president of the school board and a big realestate agent.. which in backwaterdumbshitville means that he owned the town.
Also I had her name on yahoo messenger and she came on and I said :O and "she" said SHUT UP and went offline. I wonder who it was....
Posted on November 28, 2004 9:24 AM
Her LJ account is blowing up with spammers, wisenheimers and internet tourists. It's quite a thing to behold. They could print it out and sell it in book form.
Posted on November 28, 2004 10:50 AM
I live in Anchorage, + this is blowing away the entire town. It's weird to think that other places get news from us, too, because so often, you don't, but in this case, I can see why. It's sad that this happened, but it's even more sad that she left behind such public traces of herself for everyone else to exploit.
Posted on November 28, 2004 12:01 PM
I... don't know how to edit my post. but I want to add a P.S. that asks: Where's her father in all of this?
Posted on November 28, 2004 12:14 PM
Nar: Her dad is probably in a state of disbelief, anguish, and anger right now. According to the papers he was at the court appearance. I would not want to be his shoes right now :/
Posted on November 28, 2004 12:27 PM
"Sigh, in addition to using LiveJournal, this depraved young woman was also a television watcher and a telephone. But the news reports don't mention those facts."
...because she didn't do her own TV report about it, or call everybody who wanted to know about it. She posted about it on her site. Which, come on, that's pretty noteworthy. Morbid and disturbing, but noteworthy. If anybody was trying to say LiveJournal users are matricidal or anything like that, I'd be with you. But to expect everybody to ignore such a strange angle? Silly.
Posted on November 28, 2004 3:31 PM
My friend told me about this about reading about it on the OTEP message board. I find this kind of stuff interesting and always read into but....yeah. He says that she planned the whole thing on the LJ and that it supposedly was there. If so it has since been removed my an admin. or her.
Hmmm she looks pretty good in an orange jump suit.
Posted on November 28, 2004 4:32 PM
AL is Alabama, AK is Alaska (where Craig is).
Posted on November 28, 2004 4:59 PM
I believe we've established the AK not AL thing. Give them a break.
Posted on November 28, 2004 6:11 PM
what i want to know is how you knew it was going to be posted to mefi, such that you addressed mefites in your blog entry? i smell conspiracy...
Posted on November 28, 2004 6:55 PM
Yeah man, I saw this on ljdrama.org the other day. Seriously messed up.
All I know about Alaska is that people went crazy there in that movie where Robin Williams was a murderer. So I guess everyone there is a murderer or a fatty.
Posted on November 28, 2004 10:07 PM
Here's a quote from her livejournal post of Feb 22, 2004:
"Don't you hate it when the little pieces of shit pile up to the point you're at the breaking point, and you want to scream and cry at the same time. I don't know weather to kill somebody, myself, or just curl up into a fetal position under my covers and lay there for a couple of days...."
Note: go with the third option.
Posted on November 28, 2004 10:14 PM
If there's a way to broadcast to the world with a telephone, please let me know, I would be horrified if I found out too late that was one of the buttons that could accidentally be bumped on my cell phone while in my pocket!!
More parents should hear about this, and maybe decide to learn about what their kids might be up to on the internet (and elsewhere).
If anyone thinks that by saying this, I'm saying the internet is evil... I assert that parents without experience in crossing the street should also be informed that playing in traffic is dangerous for their children!
quonsar... EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN IS POSTED TO MEFI! Who hasn't noticed this?
Posted on November 29, 2004 1:54 AM
wow...in response to the last post, "more parents should learn about what their kids are up to on the internet," the internet is not what killed that girl's mother. The girl is who killed her mother. If the internet wasn't there, the mother would have still died.
Now given, the internet would have provided an insight into that girl's mind for the mother, but you can't justify her mother peering over her blog entries any more than reading her diary, or any more than the FBI monitoring library reading lists. People do not like feeling powerless over their thoughts...and if the girl had found out that her mom was reading her blog entries, she would have had that much more motivation to murder her.
Posted on November 29, 2004 2:37 AM
Further proof that you can never trust a Wiccan Hot Topic Patron that can't spell simple words.
The media keeps going back to how she's an "honor student" in an attempt to make the murder seem more incredible, yet this seems more like the journal of someone desperately trying to be an outcast. And the horrific spelling errors make it hard to believe she was an incredible student.
The reaction of her friends also surprised me. I don't mean the ones making the "she's such a good person" posts, I mean the first LJ comment, where a girl made a joke about discussing the murder with the state troopers, before it had even come out her daughter was involved...
Posted on November 29, 2004 6:18 AM
"I told you I wuz hardcore"
Posted on November 29, 2004 7:08 AM
Talking to the relatives is standard operating procedure after a homicide- don't you wach *any* police shows, Bimmer? I don't think the friend was suggesting anything by the state troopers comment.
Posted on November 29, 2004 8:49 AM
I guess it doesn't take much to be an honor student these days.
Posted on November 29, 2004 9:49 AM
She's probably innocent.
Posted on November 29, 2004 10:00 AM
The timing of it all is very suspicious.
Posted on November 29, 2004 10:19 AM
Here come the internet rallies, the commercials, the stupid "Talk with your kids about LJ" flyers..." and Safety and the Internet classes, ... course that might just happen out in the country.
Posted on November 29, 2004 10:25 AM
Seems weird that everybody's just assuming she's guilty. Sure, she could be, but then again, if her mom was a hosebeast, there are probably other people with motive.
Posted on November 29, 2004 10:53 AM
hmm seems all the comments in her lj are being deleted very fast..i for one..printed out the entire journal before its gone.
Posted on November 29, 2004 11:29 AM
yeah. her entries are being deleted by livejournal administrators pretty fast. i wonder if they're being permanently deleted, if so, can livejournal administrators be guilty of destroying evidence? then again, they probably have backups, if not, they're boneheads.
Posted on November 29, 2004 12:56 PM
Major difference between reading your kid's diary and reading your kid's blog.
A blog is public -- broadcast to the whole world. A diary is private.
Blogging is an inherently public act -- you *want* someone else to read what you're writing, even if you'd like it to be anonymous.
Poking through your kids things, reading her diary -- that's snooping. Checking out her blog -- more like looking out the window when she's playing in the yard, to make sure she's not running in traffic.
(P.S. I'm not suggesting that the mother was negligent in *not* doing this... just defending mothers' right to do this in general.)
Posted on November 29, 2004 1:22 PM
Sorry - I just followed a link from Boing Boing to this, so I don't know all the details, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't she just been arrested? I mean, why are you all assuming she's guilty? There are a LOT of stupid, angsty, rural or suburban teenagers who write stupid angsty blogs about how they're so misunderstood, how they're so alone, how they're 'insane', and how they want to do horrible things to their parents. I doubt very much that they're all (potential) killers - most of them just need some sex / a cold shower. So I wouldn't pass judgment on the kid too quickly. Unless, of course, there is some incriminating piece of evidence that I'm not aware of, in which case I stand corrected. They are all potential killers - AAAARGH! Run for the hills!
Posted on November 29, 2004 1:43 PM
No entries are being deleted. Comments, yes. Journal entries, no. You just can't see the most recent entries since they have been marked as private. Only people on here friends list can view those.
Posted on November 29, 2004 2:08 PM
no, i think the entries were deleted gammj. i'm not a live journal subscriber, and i was able to see the journal entry this morning with all 4055 commments. now it's not there.
Posted on November 29, 2004 2:11 PM
That is a link to the entry. It is protected however. Thus, unless you are on her friends list, you cannot view it.
Posted on November 29, 2004 2:31 PM
I didn't say the internet killed her mother...
I said that maybe if her mother knew all the things she was talking about on the internet - like the older boyfriends, under-age drinking, hating her mother... Perhaps her mother would've noticed that there were obvious PROBLEMS in her daughter's life! Perhaps she would've had a heads-up on the situation.
And it's not like the FBI monitoring ADULTS - because adults are adults - she was a MINOR, and the FBI is the law, parents are parents and she was living under their roof.
And don't even get me started on the difference between a private diary and an on-line journal.
And let's face it, she was probably getting a lot of "yeah, your mother sucks" type of support on-line, not a lot of healthy solutions to her woes.
And I'm sorry, but I stand by my assertion that the internet has the proven potential to be a dangerous place for kids. (Not necessarily related to this particular incident.) It's so easy for them to basically prostitute themselves, or get taken advantage of by very nasty people, with the internet... without parents knowing at all. And I see nothing wrong with saying parents need to be better educated about the internet. It's a fact that a lot of parents have no idea what their kids are up to on the internet - and the internet is NOT "make believe" - it's real life, with real consequences.
Furthermore, I love how they say she was every parents' dream child... Um, apparently she was involved in under-age drinking and had adult boyfriends... And she had a rather unbecoming public on-line journal where she spoke badly about her parents. That wouldn't be my dream child!
(And unlike 13Strong, I don't believe teens "need sex", particularly not with elders, to cure their angst, there are plenty of emotionally healthy ways to deal with teens and their problems that don't involve sex, alcohol, or murder plots.)
As for people claiming she might be innocent - I might be mistaken, but I believe she did confess to having involvement in the crime to authorities. So I don't think anybody's out of line for "assuming she was involved" - if she said it herself.
Posted on November 29, 2004 3:05 PM
It does seem really weird that everyone automatically assumes that she did it. And pardon me Chloe, but underage drinking and adult boyfriends mean she's not a perfect kid? I started drinking when I had just turned 17 (legal age in New Zealand is 18 btw) and I turned out just fine. Good enough to work teaching kids nowadays. Anyway, I don't want to turn this into an anti comment rant.
People mentioned how her lj friends may have agreed, "your mum sucks". Well, why don't we try and avoid that. Let's hope that she is innocent and it's some true scumbag. Who would you rather have in prision, a drug dealing murderer, or a confused teenager who (might have) screwed up bigtime.
Anyway, love & peace.
Posted on November 29, 2004 4:07 PM
And people say we shouldn't have the death penalty for underage murderers. Or underage murder conspirators. Or underage murder solicitors. Er, what's she charged with again? Oh hell, just put a slug in her head.
Posted on November 29, 2004 4:08 PM
So, like, the press release fromt he state troopers has her and her boyfriends ADMITTING the murder charge.
Stop with the Let's hope she didn't do it bollocks.
And she shouldn't get the death penalty, very very few people should.
Besides whcih, if you have a death penalty, the family/loved ones of the deceased should be the ones pulling the switch, or pushing the needle in, however it's done these days. Death penalties are suppsoed to be about revenge for great evils.
Do you think the father, distraught as he is, really wants his daughter killed over this? She probably deserves to be in a psychiatric hospital.
Posted on November 29, 2004 5:26 PM
Will, if she were my kid, she would cease to be. She would be an
ex-16 year old puke.
Posted on November 29, 2004 7:48 PM
Rob - she admitted her involvement in the murder!
"During the interviews all three made admissions as to their involvement in the murder. Physical evidence recovered at the various crime scenes collaborated many of the defendant's statements."
This is stated in the article linked from the post. Did anybody read it before commenting?
They themselves, including the girl, have NOT claimed to be unconnected and innocent in this.
So yes, let's stop with the 'it might have been the boogie man' crap already.
Furthermore... The article stated that she was EVERY parent's dream child. And I stated she wasn't MY dream child. If she's your idea of a dream child fine, but I still say the article was out of line and inaccurate on that one.
When I was in high school, there was a teacher that was well-known to drink on the job, and snort illegal substances in school... and apparently he was "good enough to work teaching kids".
I'm not saying you do that, but, I'm afraid your NZ say-so hardly constitutes an across-the-board ironclad argument in favour of under-age drinking in the U.S.
And frankly, when I was 24, I had no interest in becoming romantically involved with 16 year olds, and I do question the motive and/or mentality of 24 year olds who do. That's my opinion, and it's hardly a bizarre one.
Posted on November 29, 2004 10:24 PM
Her mother sounds kind of deranged, too. That girl in the picture that Gray posted clearly doesn't need to be sent to fat camp. I'm not saying that justifies her murder, but there was something very wrong with that woman.
Posted on November 29, 2004 10:24 PM
Wow...It's my first time to this website. I don't even know what to say. I'm sorry.
Posted on November 29, 2004 11:38 PM
Alright - calm down. Like I said, I hadn't read the article, which was why a lot of my comment was provisional on the assumption that there was no incriminating evidence. But if she admitted to it along with her two boyfriends (Two? Does that mean male friends, or boyfriends? Wow... apparently sex doesn't help - who woulda thunk it?) then I guess there's a pretty good chance she was involved, yeah? Oh, and just to point out, capital punishment is not supposed to be about revenge - it's supposed to be about 'justice' and guaranteeing that a criminal never commits a similar crime. Even if she wasn't underage, do they have the death penalty in Alaska? Not that I think she should be killed.
Oh - and just to point out, the 'just needs sex' thing was a joke - I was taking the piss out of angsty teenagers. And try not to get too judgmental about teenagers who have sex and drink - those two factors are hardly indicative of a deranged mind, and I'm confident in saying that very few things are. I doubt if anyone could have seen this coming, especially (from the sound of their relationship with her) her parents.
Posted on November 30, 2004 2:06 AM
I should probably clarify and say that my "argument" about this, isn't about the girl in this story at all, but about the reporting of this story... It seems that some people would rather quell the whole LiveJournal angle and keep it under wraps in order to keep "our precious blogosphere" sacred somehow. haha. And I think that's bullocks. She had a livejournal, people know about it now, and that's that. Reporting that fact is NOT anti-internet or anti-technology, nor is it neo-Luddite. Come on!
13Strong: I figured you were joking about that - but the thing is, it's rather trite when someone says someone just needs to get laid and they'd be fine... As if lack of sex is the root of all problems, of those of all ages. I don't think that was Ted Bundy's problem.
And when it comes to my own teenage children, I'll be as judgemental as I like when it comes to breaking the law and having sex, when I'll be the one who has to pay the medical bills when the kid gets STDs or pregnant, and I'll be the one paying their fines. Believe me, the 17 year old me would be horrified to hear me say this - but as long as they live under my roof, they'll be living by my rules. haha.
(BTW: I don't have children.)
Posted on November 30, 2004 3:52 AM
Hey - well at least you understood it was a joke. And I agree with you on the whole internet thing - it's just another medium - there is nothing sacred about messages broadcast on the internet.
Just to clarify - in no way was I saying that sex is the answer to everyone's problems, mental or otherwise, regardless of age. I think you're taking my (non-serious) point too far. I was just making a joke about teenage angst, which, I think you'll agree, is taken both far too seriously by teens themselves, and not at all seriously enough by their guardians (given the rising levels of clinical depression and self-mutilation amongst teenagers). And thinking about it, considering how god-awful teenage sex is, it's probably for their own benefit if they do abstain until they know what they're doing. Sorry - I'm getting off the point, which was that I was joking.
But as to your final point - First of all, we're not talking about your teenagers, we're talking about teenagers in general, and about one teenager specifically. And in that situation, I don't think being judgmental as to their illegal habits is particularly useful.
Secondly, if your own teenage kids do end up having unprotected sex and getting fined for underage drinking, then I think it's apparent that your judgmental parenting style hasn't done much good! I have no problem with the idea of non-interference in parenting generally, but there are obviously limits, as might be illustrated in the case in hand. It sounds to me (although it's hard to filter out real indications through the sea of teen-angst hyperbole and whining) like the mother have been quite psychologically, if not physically, abusive to her daughter. But who knows - more wild speculation! This is turning into a tabloid newspaper...
Plus, that sounds like I'm blaming the parents now, which worries me slightly... I'd be loathe to blame any one influence or cause...
Posted on November 30, 2004 5:36 AM
The Internet didn't make her do this. LiveJournal didn't make her do this. It's clear from her posts that she suffers from intense depression and has a lot of anger directed toward the world in general--perhaps more so toward her mother. Just because she was able to post her thoughts to LJ doesn't mean that LJ actually assisted in the decision-making process. It means that others knew of her intentions beforehand and could've moved to prevent her from going through with her plans by getting her some much-needed help.
Does this make some of the LJers accomplices? Most definitely they are accomplices if they knew about her plot and did not report it. But, if that's the case, then 90% of LJers need to be reported for mentioning their homocidal tendencies. The point is: you just can't take a journal posting seriously because the person could just be venting their frustrations. However, placing your internal thoughts on the table for public consumption is very dangerous since they can be misconstrued.
So, who is to be blamed here? The girl and the murderers.
Surely, others could have come to her aid earlier and prevented this, but in the end, she went through with it. Even those she asked to do the deed could have prevented it, but they chose to abide by her wishes, so they are also at fault.
Posted on November 30, 2004 7:51 AM
Am I the only one who beleives when someone is murdered in a premeditated manour that they did something wrong?
This girl is made into some 2D monster with no brain just out to do things for no reason.
I somehoe doubt this.
Having contrmplaited killing my own mother a few times but desiding not to as I'd get caught, I can sympathise.
The internet doesn't make me think about it.
Being locked in a room with my mother does.
LJ does not make me think about killing.
It doesn't help.
As stated, it simply gives others an opertunity to calm me down before I explode and attempt to murder somehting.
Why one arth lj is being sited is completely beyond me. How can you be so stupid as to blame an online journal? Does this make notepads responsable for killing people? Because people keep real journals too...
Can everyone here honestly say that they've never been so pissed off they'd like to see someone dead? once in their lives? Not even once? Yes, you didn't do it. But sometimes there's just somehting that pushes people over the edge - and we don't really know what exactly that was.
To manage to get two other people envolved to help you, it's got to be pretty bad.
Posted on November 30, 2004 8:37 AM
okay first off.. i don't really see many people blaming LJ so i don't know why so many of you are bending over backwards to clear lj and the internet of the guilt for the crime (clearly neither lj or the internet is to blame). second, one thing that just doesn't make ANY sense these guys were EX-boyfriends, who in teh WORLD kills someone for their EX??? Hell who even kills someone for their current g/f or b/f??? (unless of course therse some revenge or self defense or something) it just doesn't add up.. regardless of whether or not you have thought about killing someone ... let alone your own mother, if you get pushed over that edge you pay the consequences... on top of that those two are the dumbest murderers in the history of mankind, why in the world would u set the van on fire??? you can see smoke from a far from such long distances, not to say i wanted them to get away with it (obviously im glad they didn't get away and will be rotting in prison), but damn if you are going to do something, do it right
Posted on November 30, 2004 11:09 AM
To Erynn - if you have thoughts, SERIOUS thoughts, about killing your mother, you need to go see a doctor. There is something WRONG with you. People who feel they have no other option than to kill someone have serious issues that need to be dealt with. If that is finding a way to move away from an abusive and neglectful parent, then that is what needs to be done. If it is getting on medication to help balance out moods so that everything does not seem so horrible all the time, then that is what needs to be done. NO ONE should EVER take the idea of ACTUALLY taking a life of another human being lightly and just shrug it off saying "I would get caught." It is not healthy human behavior.
Second, there are very few things you could say to convince me that ANYONE deserves to be murdered, pre-meditated or impulsively. If someone is abusive, mean, drinks, takes drugs, hurts others, etc. there is ALWAYS something you can do to get away from that person, no matter what the situation. ESPECIALLY with the Internet being what it is today. You could make your own website and raise money to move across country to a better place, or live with a different relative, or a friend's parents, or SOMETHING!!! There are always options and life is not always horrible and unbearable. It does get better, I swear!
All that being said, are the people on here 12 years old or something? I am 34 and I have a livejournal, I have no kids but have several nieces and nephews and many friends who have had kids over the last several years. You have kids, you PAY attention to them, you set boundaries and you set guidelines. There is no such thing as "hands-off" parenting. That is how you get kids that turn out like the unruly, cursing, cretins that you see on the Jenny Jones and Sally shows. You are a parent, you are supposed to TEACH your kids how to live in this world. That means teaching them how to get past the bad stuff and how to enjoy the good stuff.
Be responsible. That's the bottom line here people. Take responsibility for your actions and realize there are always other options!
All this could be wrong.
Posted on November 30, 2004 12:19 PM
"Further proof that you can never trust a Wiccan Hot Topic Patron that canít spell simple words."?
Excuse me? As a member of the Wiccan clergy and sometimes goth, I am disappointed that my first visit to this website had to include a statement such as that. While the author probably intended it to be a joke, the incorrect associations between acts of violence, goths and Wiccans that exsist in popular culture is no laughing matter to me.
From a quick scan of LJ entries still on public display, it sounds like she had some severe problems (including mental ones) that may have been the motivation for her alleged involvement in her mother's murder. The simple fact of her religion or what clothes she wore seem to have had little bearing in this case. To illustrate my point, imagine someone saying of Scott Peterson "well, I guess you can't believe any guy who's Catholic and wears Dockers, now can you?"
And while she claims she has been Wiccan "for as long as I can remember," well, since she is only 16 and apparently raised in a Christian family (she mentions going to church), I must question how long she had been practicing and studying the religion's theology. If she had, she would have known that it more often than not prohibits the killing of other humans unless in self-defense.
I apologize for seeming so humorless in this message. Usually, I'm a pretty goofy gal....
Posted on November 30, 2004 12:31 PM
i love how people keep saying alleged READ THE ARTICLE.. all three of them confessed... geez its not too difficult. Second i dont think trust catholics anyways... or any religious nut for that matter.. thats just my 2 cents. And regardless if shes chritian or jewish or wicca or whatever, i think just about every religion (i said JUST ABOUT, not all) would not condone killing in any instance outside of self defense so using that point to debunk her supposed alliance with wicca theology is rather moot... and what does "sometimes goth" mean? are you claiming that goth is a religion too?? lol
Posted on November 30, 2004 12:54 PM
to clarify in the last message (i need to learn to proofread b4 i post) i meant to delete think.. "i dont trust catholics anyways" was what i meant to say
Posted on November 30, 2004 12:55 PM
We were talking about MY teenagers - because the article said this girl was every parent's dream teen, or something like that. And the whole thing got started because I said she wasn't my dream kid!
I don't know why everyone gets so defensive when someone expresses their opinion as if they're trying to make it a law. I think because there are too many people who want to make their opinions law.
Like I said, I think the drinking age is too high in the U.S., and I would be in favour of changing it to Germany's standards. But, as long as it's illegal for 16 year olds to drink, it would be against the rules of my household if I had a 16 year old. I would also educate my children on the possible negative effects of alcohol consumption.
As for unprotected sex... I was FULLY educated about sex, and the possible negative consequences. And also given the information that EVEN protected sex is not 100% protection against the consequences. I never got pregnant, & I've never had an STD. I think my mother did JUST FINE in her parenting style, so I would indeed follow in her footsteps on that count.
Just because you make something against the rules, doesn't mean you don't tell the kid WHY. (In other words, don't assume I'm some right-wing christian fanatic who's preaching abstinence and that birth control is evil... if that's what you were assuming.)
I'm hesitant to "blame the parent" for something an 16 or 17 year old does in the present time. But my friend is a psychiatrist, and I've talked to her about a lot of mental disorders, and read some of her books... And apparently Personality Disorders actually originate in childhood, as a result of the environment the kid is in, and their family life. So I think parents do have a lot of responsibility in their kids' mental development.
To acknowledge this is NOT necessarily to say that parents should be put in jail for what their kids do.
And I definitely think that it's an adult's responsibility to get help for whatever problems their upbringing may have caused for them.
And who has blamed LiveJournal for the murder?? Please cite a direct example of someone blaming LiveJournal. Otherwise, you're just arguing a straw man. Irrelevant Thesis!
Are we supposed to completely ignore the fact that she had a LiveJournal? Because to simply cite she had a livejournal, is to blame LiveJournal? I'm not getting the logic with that one.
The only thing I said was that maybe if her parents (or some adult in her family) saw her journal on the internet, they may have realized that she was having problems. (We don't know if she ever expressed to her mother how upset she was about things, we don't know at all.)
I do think some kids might be better helped if their parents knew what they were telling all the world except for their parents. Though that doesn't mean I think the authorities should be stepping in on kids' personal web-sites willy-nilly!
And I stand by my assertion that I think someone's more likely to get some rational, calm, advice for their problems from close friends in their life (who care about the person), than they are likely to get it from strangers on the internet enjoying a soap opera in the person's life. That's not to say people don't make real friends on the internet. It's just that dysfunction is very popular entertainment, as reality tv and jerry springer shows attest.
Although I have wished people out of my life (not necessarily dead - but just out of my life), particularly when I was a kid and didn't have control over who was in my life. But no, I've never had any plots to kill anyone. I don't think everyone plots murder. I think most people would look for the many alternative solutions first. On the other hand, I don't think everyone who plots murder actually does it, or is necessarily mentally ill. Like I don't think Agatha Christie was bonkers, or ever actually killed anyone.
Posted on November 30, 2004 2:32 PM
For whoever commented that she kept an LJ with plans for the murder... um, no. That's the RUMOR, but the reality is there was nothing in her LJ about her plans (at least not in any public posts I read soon after the whole thing came to light and before LJ started locking down entries), and there was nothing about her 24-year-old boyfriends, and there was also nothing indicating her mother was abusive. A bit strict, probably. But abusive? There was some mention of restriction of food... that was the closest thing to abuse that was mentioned in her LJ.
Just clarifying some things...
Posted on November 30, 2004 3:37 PM
Agree with Chloe on the dream teen point. Nobody is saying that underage drinking is the worst thing a kid can do, they're just saying it's not perfect. It is, after all, breaking a law. Tell me how many parents dream of their kids breaking laws. As far as the teenage sex goes, I'm not saying it's wrong, but again, not perfect. I just can't imagine law breaking and early sex being in a parent's plans for his child's future.
At any rate, she's hardly anyone's dream kid, honor student or not, being that she had her mother killed.
Posted on November 30, 2004 4:10 PM
When I first found the link to the LJ the top entry to appear included references to her acquisition of a poisonous substance, and her regret that it wasn't lethal (or in her words 'leathal'). That was about 8 hours ago (16.00 BST). Unfortunately I can't remember the name of the substance.
Presumably by that point LJ administrators had already started deleting entries, as every time I check back there the entries are disappearing one by one.
Unfortunately every time I check back there the post at the top of the list is already beginning to populate with comments from trolls laughing at her for potentially going to prison. Somehow, perhaps gratefully, I don't think she'll get to read them.
Posted on November 30, 2004 4:12 PM
"And frankly, when I was 24, I had no interest in becoming romantically involved with 16 year olds, and I do question the motive and/or mentality of 24 year olds who do. That's my opinion, and it's hardly a bizarre one"
And when you were 16, you had no interest in becoming romantically involved with Older Boys, I suppose?
"I do question the motive and/or mentality of 24 year olds who do."
I agree. Obviously the mentality, in this case, appears to be the same mentality that can lead to pre-meditated murder.
Posted on November 30, 2004 4:22 PM
Actually.. even though this goes from awhile back.. the "Heavenly Creatures" title comes from the movie w/ the same name by Peter Jackson. The storyline of the movie is based on the true events of two friends who plot to kill the one girl's mother. Quite a disturbing film, but worth a watch.
Posted on November 30, 2004 5:12 PM
Further to my previous comment, I would suggest that the reason it is now impossible to access the more recent posts on the girl's LJ is not because they are friends only, but an exercise by LJ administrators to preserve the original content for investigators to examine.
I'm sure investigators would rather not wade through 1449 'Ha ha you're going to prison :p' replies. It would serve their forensic examination far better to have only the original replies, and presumably the LJ admin team are filtering anything posted after the time they're interested in.
Besides digital 'papertrails' and the likes, investigations can glean quite a lot by analysing typing patterns and checking for corresponding anomalies in other forms of media found in the girl's posession. Judging by the amount of spelling and grammatical errors, it shouldn't be too hard to identify patterns and draw parallels.
Posted on November 30, 2004 5:56 PM
passerby: No. I didn't seriously consider significantly older men to be romantic prospects when I was in high school.
When I was 16, 24 year olds were not in my teen social circles, and therefore not in my dating pool. When I was 17, I dated an 18 year old, and he was considered an "Older Boy" at the time, among my social circles, as I was in high school and he was in college. When I was 19-20, I had a 17 year old boy asking me out, and I turned him down. He wasn't unattractive, I just didn't think it was a good relationship prospect.
When I was a TEENAGER, the largest dating age difference I had was dating a 22 year old when I was 19, and already living on my own supporting myself - and the 22 year old lived 'at home' with his widowed mother. (Interesting side note, I first saw the movie "Heavenly Creatures" with that guy.)
I'm not saying age differences are wrong. I've dated men significantly older than me. But not before the age of 21.
I'm simply saying I find adults dating kids in high school somewhat suspect, and it woulnd't be my dream as a parent to have a 16 year old daughter dating men in their mid-20s or older.
I would NOT consider that pedophilia or any such ridiculous thing. Just not my ideal.
And I will say this, absolutely... If a 30+ guy I knew dated girls in high school, I certainly wouldn't date him. I'm sorry if it sounds judgemental, but yes, a 30 year old guy who dated 15 year old would seem possibly pervy to me, and definitely not on my relationship wavelength. If anyone else feels differently, they're certainly free to do so.
Posted on November 30, 2004 9:53 PM
Does anyone have a copy of the original posts that are now locked down. I've seen lots of links but they aren't available anymore.
Posted on December 1, 2004 6:22 AM
According to standard journalistic procedure (I was a journalist for 5 years), the trio must be refered to as the "alledged murderers". The front page of the Anchorage paper only said that they each had been charged. The press release from the Alaska state troopers said that they had each made "admissions" to some role in the murder. That does not add up to a total confession of the crime. In many states and some newspapers, a confession isn't really a confession until a guilty plea is entered in court. A confession can be recanted if the defendent enters a plea of not guilty. The lawyer can then claim that her client's statements to the police should be thrown out for various reasons. Also, in a case such as this, we don't know exactly what any one of the accused has fessed up to doing. It's not unusual in such a situation for members of the plot to turn against each other and claim they had nothing to do with the actual fatal action. But up until the time someone actually pleads guilty they are technically the "accused" or "alledged" criminals charged in a crime who have "made incriminating statements" or "admitted to having a role" in the crime according to police. After a guilty plea or conviction, they become the "confessed" or convicted criminal.
Yeah, I know, it sounds like linguistic hair-splitting, but newspapers and TV stations have been sued over such gymnastics. But, my sources may not have the latest info, and they may have entered pleas by now.
On Wicca: Unfortunately, many people think that paganism (an unbrella that Wicca falls under) gives its followers a green light to do anything they want: sex, drugs, murder, you name it. This idea arose from mainly from propaganda from some ultra-conservative folks in the past and the highly-publicized antics of a few bad apples. Thus, when pagans get arrested, it's common for folks presume that the fact of their faith is some sort of evidence towards their guilt--something that rarely happens with Christians, Jews, and members of more mainstream religions. Whenever something like this case pops up, I try to make sure people volunteering their time to discuss it have the right info--that said individual is not representative of the whole.
And as for goth as a faith ... well, the way some of my friends do it, it comes pretty darn close! ;)
Posted on December 1, 2004 8:30 AM
one would think even an ex-journalist would be able to spell alleged!
Posted on December 1, 2004 12:04 PM
just to clear some things up...... I live here in Craig AK. I knew Rachelle and one of the 24 year old men worked for me. She did not plan it all on the LJ. I read it two days after her arrest. It has since been largely deleted. I assume that a close friend told the family and they obtained her password and started to delet it. There were close to 6000 comments on her journal before they made it "friends only" therefore blocking any incoming comments from ppl that were not currently in her friends list. so anyways.... she did not plan it on the LJ.. she did however write about her relationship with her mother... making references to being grouunded without food several times and her om calling her fat all the time(which she was not) and wanting to send her to "fat camp"..... she talked about suicide, death, and a lot of other things.... but no murder plans.....
Posted on December 1, 2004 11:18 PM
I saved most of her LiveJournal enteries, and posted them all on my LJ, just to have a place where my friends and family could go to read about it. If anyone here is interested, and hasn't had a chance to read all the things she posted, you can read most of it here:
Click on "Previous 20"
Posted on December 2, 2004 1:59 AM
Some of the recent entries are archived at Bloglines:
Posted on December 2, 2004 9:21 PM
also some other guy saved the whole thing almost entirely... must have taken up a whole lot of time and space..... but here is the link ..
P.S. Again... I live here in the community and I am reading a lot of false info here.... too much to respond to.... if anyone has any specific questions about the murder, arrests, or people involved, please feel free to ask.
Posted on December 4, 2004 3:26 AM
i was just wondering if she is in jail, why is it that her profile on live journal was updated 2 weeks ago? Did this all just happened?
Posted on December 5, 2004 12:28 AM
yeah, this all happened on the 13th of november, + then she was arrested the next weekend (the 20th).
Posted on December 5, 2004 3:53 PM
this news article explains a little more.
I can't figure it out either though. All 3 of them were pretty normal. the two guys were very nice. Jason Arrant was a little wierd, he worked for me last year and I let him go because he had a bad temper with some of the youth that he worked with. I bought paintball supplies from the other 24 year old. None of them seemed capable of this. we are reeling from the impact of this nightmare.
Posted on December 6, 2004 9:58 AM
I think it should be illegal to delete journal entries in case this shit happens again.
What kind of society would one have to grow up in to have the MENTALITY required to do that to their own mother who just dedicated her life to raising them?
Posted on December 6, 2004 2:33 PM
Mirror of her LJ prior to mass deletions: http://www.sixsixsix.org/smchyrocky-54/
Read back far enough, you notice the claims of "abuse" don't start until after the plans to murder already started. Also heard she was involved with someone called "TheMansonFamily"-"Kassi".. Anyone know what that was all about, or has it not been researched by the police?
Posted on December 10, 2004 8:22 PM