GUILTY WI - 12-Year-Old Girls Stab Friend 19 Times for Slenderman, Waukesha, 31 May 2014 #2

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
My one major point of dissent is that I believe AW had a much bigger part in this, even if she did not do most of the stabbing.
Click to expand...

Hi Ausgirl!

I think you may be right. MG has been shown to have serious mental health issues including psychotic episodes. AW has not received the same diagnosis,although her defense is contesting the doctor's report.

So... a believable motive for this attack is that AW was vying for PL's position as MG's best friend. According to a New York Times article, classmates said the friendship between the three girls was not equal (PL and MG were very close, AW not so much) so it may be that AW wasn't having a lot of success in winning MG over by "normal" means. From the various articles, it doesn't seem like AW and PL knew each other particularly well - only due to their mutual friend, MG.

According to ABC, PL's mother said that MG and PL had recently been getting into arguments and MG had become more controlling. This was upsetting to PL who just wanted to make things right. She didn't seem to understand what she had done to upset MG. MG persisted in sending PL Slender Man stories even though PL had asked he not to because they terrified her. PL believed that Slender Man was real, because MG had told her so. So a wedge was being driven between MG and PL. Was this change in MG's behavior in part due to deliberate actions by AW?

Noticeable by its absence is any reference to PL until MG allegedly suggested they kill her. I'd lay odds that there WERE prior conversations between MG and AW about PL. I can imagine them discussing PL's negative views regarding Slender Man, and the question of PL's loyalty as a friend arising as a consequence. In AW's statement, however, the first mention of PL is when MG "surprises" her by suggesting they kill her... but AW does not show any curiosity as to why it should be PL and not someone else.

AW could have been "feeding" ideas to MG. For example, the idea that the girls become proxies of Slender Man originates - according to AW's statement - from MG. AW makes it seem as though this was something that she had never considered, and did not know how to accomplish. However... the topic HAD come up before in connection with AW. Around January 3rd, on a Slender Man forum, someone asked how someone could become (by choice) a proxy of Slender Man. The questioner created a new account in order to post, employing the same user name as a Tumblr account owned by AW's sister. Internet searches for this name only show up in connection with these two accounts. The uniqueness of the name, the subject matter and timing make it hard to believe this is a coincidence.

Assuming AW is found competent to stand trial (there's a review of this in December) I imagine the prosecution will focus on AW's intentions and her understanding of MG's state. I think AW was aware that MG was undergoing mental issues - she even refers to MG as having a "mental breakdown" in the bathroom.

Another factor that we don't know is the true nature of MG and PL's "best friend" statusbefore the arrival of AW. Was this equally reciprocated, or was MG not, in fact, as close to PL as PL was to her? In the ABC article PL's mother states that PL was extremely excited about the sleepover. On the other hand, MG teased PL in comments made on PL's Google+ account regarding PL's love of Katy Perry's music. This was only 4 weeks prior to the attack. (The account was closed down around the time PL returned to school).

I imagine that it will require input from PL in order for us to understand the true story leading up to the attack... as well as forensic evidence from iPads, laptops, and phones.
 
mikkismom said:
We are all one poor choice from being a subject on this forum. Think twice
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth. There were so many opportunities for this awful chain of events to have been stopped. I'm guessing that the reason it was not stopped is going to feature strongly in the outcome of the trial.

AW turned 13 on the 10th. Seems unlikely she is going to see freedom during any of her teen years. If both girls are deemed to be competent (MG's attorney had not yet read the report from the Health Services doctor), then at least the cases can proceed. Without this, the reverse-waiver hearing cannot take place, and they will remain in the adult system (this may happen anyway, of course).

I can't help but feel that this will be a landmark case for trying children as adults due to the severity of the crime. It will come down to a fight between the cultural desire for retribution on one hand versus the science that tells us that the brains of children and adults are NOT the same. Behavior that in a child does not attract attention (such as the belief that Slender Man is real) would almost certainly attract attention if that same behavior was displayed in an adult. In the case of the child, we would assume imaginative play, in an adult, we would assume or mental illness.

We have seen reports - including that of ABC - that clearly show that many kids believe Slender Man is real, or they are at least not sure. My questions would be:

1. How did PL become the target? Was she just "available" in the sense that she was the only one they could persuade to attend the sleepover, and was trusting, or had her negativity toward MG's beliefs triggered the murderous impulse?

2. Why didn't AW reject the idea - did she think it was some kind of game that would never lead to anything, or did she have a vested interest in getting PL out of the way?

3. What was the "best friends" relationship between MG and PL really like? It sounded like MG called the shots, and that her dominance was becoming stronger. Was their friendship actually waning after the move to Middle School?

4. How was AW's interest in the genre influenced by her older siblings, and by the changes in her home life over the past couple of years?

5. For a situation that has been widely reported as "carefully planned", why did the girls do virtually nothing to escape detection after the stabbing? They didn't clean themselves up, didn't get rid of the weapon and don't appear to have tried to conceal themselves. When arrested, they readily admitted to the crime.

6. Out on a limb here a bit... but did they for some reason want to go to jail?

It sounds like we may know more soon...
 
Yup, I'd lay bets on AW being behind MG acting more bossy and upsetting PL with the stories. Having in recent years experienced my own DD growing through this period of her life, I've observed this dynamic in play, in a lesser way, in the preteen dynamics of my DD's social circle. MG sees her old best friend with new eyes, once the new friend (who appears to be more cool and exciting than the old one, someone whose acceptance and approval MG desires) starts grumping and sneering at her rival, pointing out how uncool PL is.. over time, affection gets replaced with scorn and it turns into bullying to one degree or another. Add that strange dynamic of the 'toxic duo' as I call it, where a friendship becomes a closed circuit and the kids over-identify with each other, at the expense of other friendships (and sometimes, all good sense) -- and add to that, mental fragility on MG's behalf -- well, I can see a clear line from A to Z, right there.

I think AW and her Slenderman stuff tipped MG from fragile to somewhere way less stable as time went on. Not trying to demonise AW here, or diminish MG's part in the attack, but that's how the "toxic duo" thing generally happens. If AW had not met MG, I dare say MG and PL would be best friends, even now (PL's behaviour suggests bewilderment, and eagerness to go back to how things used to be with MG, IMO, which suggests the breakdown of the friendship had happened quite recently, and in a way PL did not understand).

As for planning VS thinking through to consequences -- it's quite possible that it was both a carefully planned crime, and that the planning centered wholly around the crime itself with little to no thought as to what might come next. I think that'd be due to their age - when kids that age or younger "run away" from home, for example.. they're generally not thinking ahead as to how they'll survive in the world, as an older person might. It's all about the running away and then.. *bewildered*.
 
Kudos to Ausgirl for an awesome post. You outlined a simple and believable explanation of what happened which I find totally compelling. A couple of things you said reminded me of my own experiences: how rapidly a close friendship can turn into something really unpleasant. And the incredibly dark - but not at all unusual - thoughts and deeds of kids at that age.

I think the most frightening aspect of this case is the apparent "ordinariness" of the circumstances. Everyone said they were capable students from good families, no history of criminal behavior, etc, etc. And so one thinks: "if those kids could do that, could kids here do that to my child", or "could my child do that to another kid"? And the answer, IMO, is without doubt "yes", given the appropriate unfortunate set of circumstances:

1. Psychotic behavior (losing touch with what is and isn't real) is a factor in many different mental illnesses. Perhaps the incident with MG and the mallet ("I have a weapon and I can do anything I want with it") was an early indication of this. Of course, we don't know if this led to any psychiatric evaluation/treatment, or whether it was seen to be a bizarre but isolated incident that didn't merit further action.

2. The transition from elementary (primary) education brings about huge changes in what may have been solid friendships. PL seems to be just what she should be at 12 - a child. She still enjoyed playing with her American Girl dolls (as did MG), volunteered at the animal shelter, and was in no way involved or interested in the disturbing world of Creepy Pasta and the like. I totally agree with Ausgirl's hypothesis: new cool friend comes along who shares MG's interests, and suddenly PL doesn't match up. I've seen the controlling behavior that comes of scorn or contempt, and the sadness and bewilderment of the other party who no longer makes the grade. And that person tries to make it right again, but just makes the situation (and the contempt) worse.

I think this resolves my question about "why PL"? The answer is the utter contempt that kids that age can show toward one another. It wouldn't be a problem to kill her because she was "lame" so it didn't matter. A horrific prior example of this kind of cruelty was seen in the murder of 12 year-old Shanda Sharer by 4 girls aged 15 - 17. This was an act that was the epitome of appalling. The perpetrators said it was "pure peer pressure".

This WAS bullying. MG was taunting PL online only 4 weeks before the attack, mocking her love of Katy Perry, and calling her "mainstream". The kind of cruelty we're talking about here would have no problem with the duplicity of inviting the victim to a sleepover expressly to kill her, or pretending they were going to get help after the stabbing.

3. The toxic friendship. Again, Ausgirl nailed this I think, sadly from her own experiences within her family. AW apparently went elsewhere to elementary school, and was starting a Middle School in which she may have had no existing friends. She would have seen MG daily on the school bus, as they lived in the same townhouse complex. There were a number of negative events in her recent past (which I won't enumerate here), which would very likely have made her escape into the virtual world to escape the real one. I can only imagine that her friendship with MG, who not only shared her interests, but also lived a few yards away, may have seemed incredibly important.

There was a clue to the dynamic between the girls right before the stabbing, when MG said "I'm not going to until you tell me to...". At first, I thought this was an attempt to offload some of the blame, but now I think it was because MG knew it was wrong and needed the "push" from AW.

4. The game that went too far. AW - obviously - should have spoken to someone immediately about MG's suggestion that they kill PL. She must have seen how important this was to MG, although I'll bet she didn't REALLY think it would ever happen. But she would (and did) do anything to preserve/strengthen their friendship. She must have believed that telling someone about MG's suggestion would be the end of their friendship... and maybe MG wasn't serious. But she probably didn't know at that point that MG was mentally unstable and REALLY was serious. And so it continued with MG believing it to be a real plan and AW not having the strength to end it. This secret planning became the core of their friendship, and maybe that's why there was no thought of "later"... the plan would be done with. What would hold them together? And if the plan wasn't real - did that mean the friendship wasn't real either?

5. They are NOT adults. If they had been... this would not have happened. This is the supreme irony in trying them as adults: they are being tried as adults for a crime that adults in as similar as they could be circumstances would not have committed. This isn't an adult crime - it's a child crime!

I think that MG really did believe Slender Man to be real. PL certainly thought she did in a conversation with her mother "...MG knows he is real...". I also think there must have been a grandiose aspect to her symptoms - she had exclusive connections with various characters that others did not have... and she was not bound by the same rules. Her classmates commented on her aloofness in a NY Times article. I think that her symptoms must have been greatly exacerbated by the contemplation of what she was planning. Living in a mythical world freed her of the boundaries of the real one, and provided a feeling of great power.

There is no one clear "reason" that this happened, but a series of contributing factors. None of them are exclusive to these two girls. This is a contentious proposition, because it means that unlikely though it is, the same thing could happen again... without the adults involved recognizing the signs before its too late. And that's not what people want to believe.
 
ICS said:
There is no one clear "reason" that this happened, but a series of contributing factors. None of them are exclusive to these two girls. This is a contentious proposition, because it means that unlikely though it is, the same thing could happen again... without the adults involved recognizing the signs before its too late. And that's not what people want to believe.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. And not so unlikely at all, that it could happen again (different details, same outcome). It's really just an exacerbation of what is relatively normal child behaviour, which is not always *desirable* behaviour but usually doesn't result in profound harm. It's a fact that I have experienced an analogous dynamic in my own family, and I while I do not subscribe to 'helicopter' micro-management of my child, I am a good parent who keeps a general eye on things -- thank goodness-- and shut the situation down before it took a bad turn.

I don't think a closed-circuit friendship is necessarily a bad thing, either, for the majority of kids drawn to that kind of dyanamic. It can very beneficial to kids who are 'bookish', to whom group activities may be unpleasant, even damaging. I myself as a bookish kid (and, mind you, one who would have been all over Creepypasta like white on rice) had a couple of wonderful friends in that regard, extremely positive 'soulmate' friendships that I think of very fondly to this day. It is just so very important that *both* kids are stable. Where one is not, the other will start to lean that way too. Where BOTH are not - well. Case in point, I suppose. The bullying/fighting/sneering at former best friends, or any other notable turnabout in attitude is probably the biggest red flag that all's not well, IMO., and it's time to wedge those kids apart.

My DD snapped right back to her normal life, and there's been no further cause for concern.
Her friend soon became a drug addicted criminal and hung herself.

The friend was really, really good at hiding her darker self. Even from me, who has a powerful, built-in sociopath-radar. Were she not, I may have severed the friendship much, much sooner than I did.. but yeah, the turning on other kids was the flag I *should* have picked up on earlier than I did. I think of it a lesson learned, and wisdom I can pass on.
 
Good, I'm glad that her mental health seems much improved.
Click to expand...

Yes - that is something positive. I wasn't sure if they'd just let her languish in detention.

The question is to what degree her mental health issues affected her judgment. IMO, you could almost take the mental health aspect out of the equation and possibly end up with the same result.

I think Slender Man fan fiction stories in particular are significant, due to their content and the apparent age and gender of most of the authors. The major characters are killers of one type or another, and almost all kids. The victims are often people that wronged the killer in some way (e.g. a bully). They live in a forest with Slender Man in his mansion - there is a strong theme of being there because they have proved themselves worthy by their violent actions. Many (perhaps most) of the stories appear to be written by girls, which I also feel is noteworthy. Some of them are not stories of violence at all - but romantic (!!!) fiction.

It seems MG identified strongly with these themes and characters to the point of obsession. Her best friend didn't share the obsession and actively rejected it. My impression is that MG was the dominant member of the duo (MG and PL) and the rejection was both surprising and humiliating. Ironically, these same stories seemed to offer a way to avenge wrongs... by killing the "wrongdoer". and she was aided and abetted in this by the new friend, AW, who saw an opportunity for herself. Regarding the scorn and bewilderment mentioned by Ausgirl earlier, PL's mother described this exactly:

- MG kept sending her stories although she'd asked her not to because they terrified her (partly because she also thought Slender Man to be real)

- Matters came to an head, and there was some kind of discussion between PL and MG. PL's mother said after that no more stories were sent

- PL's mother said that recently, MG would get mad with PL and they would argue. PL didn't know why, and would try to fix things. PL's mother described MG as becoming increasingly controlling

Could it all be as "simple" as that? Well - it is said that the simplest explanation is often the correct one.
 
^ Well, it could be that simple, for sure and mainly, I think it is. But there's a couple of possible added factors that may have contributed to the "perfect storm":

-- Both MG and AW have family members with an interest in the horror genre. Fictional horror constructs *were* a factor in their real life, - so they should, perhaps more than most kids, have a pretty clear understanding of the difference between horror fantasy and what actually happens in their worlds. I 100% agree that it's likely the immersive fan fiction culture that created whatver level of confusion exists in either of them. I also suspect that trollish persons who target those sites may have egged the blurring of these lines on, in one way or another - if so, I would expect that info to come out in court. It does happen, and may well have contributed to the events in this case.

-- Hormones/tweenager dynamics. They can be bad enough for any kid. No-one can create, sustain and exacerbate drama like an 11-12 year old girl. Near-hysterical, unrealistic beliefs based in emotional desires are not uncommon (("Justin Beiber would so marry me (and not that b*tch Susan from home economics!), if only we met..one day, Justin.. you WILL be mine!!" )) .. Nursing grudges and resentment is also a feature of this wonderful age group.

-- Bigger picture stuff, a world where serial killers are now equivalent to movie stars and violence is everywhere you look, etc etc., and as several poster have pointed out here, that cultural knowledge seeps into the minds of kids who don't even access to the interwebs/ a lot TV.

But mainly, I think any/all of this only fuelled a toxic, closed circuit friendship focussed on a changing dominance hierarchy or 'pecking order' (AW taking over from MG, MG increasing dominance over PL)/rejection of the former best friend. And in my opinion, AW had far more to do with the intended "disposal" of the rival than it outwardly seems.

MG's increasingly controlling behaviour toward PL could have been backwash from AW seizing dominance in the group dynamic, for example, but I think some conscious and direct pressure from AW (out of jealousy) was in there, too.
 
And in my opinion, AW had far more to do with the intended "disposal" of the rival than it outwardly seems.

Great post Ausgirl ;-)

MG's increasingly controlling behaviour toward PL could have been backwash from AW seizing dominance in the group dynamic, for example, but I think some conscious and direct pressure from AW (out of jealousy) was in there, too.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It must have been a very intense friendship that blossomed quickly. They had only known each other for around 3 months when the seeds of the plan were sown. AW had given MG the pet name "Kitty" (because MG has cats, although so does AW), and she used the name at the near-fatal moment: "...kitty, now..." according to the complaint. I got the impression from MG's statement that it is only AW that called her Kitty.

AW's stepbrother stated in the Daily Mail article that AW couldn't tell dreams from reality. That's a pretty damning statement, and suggests a known issue with AW in this regard. AW's sister has never been mentioned in press reports (surprisingly), but I'd bet that AW found out about CreepyPasta and Slender Man from her online activities, which cover this genre as well as much, much more. (To be clear, there is nothing that suggests that the sister's interest is anything other than entertainment and artistic interest).

I do wonder if the siblings had argued the idea that Slender Man is real (or not) PRIOR to the event. One piece of evidence: on the Slender Man forum on January 3rd, someone asked how one could intentionally become a proxy. The person asking the question used a user name used for another account by AW's sister. (This account name is not found in search results in any other context). This points to a debate between the siblings in which an attempt was made to show that there isn't a way to intentionally become a proxy... except in the fan fiction, which doesn't "count". I wonder if AW was trying to prove her own siblings wrong and they were the skeptics she mentioned? Yikes. Regardless, I don't believe that MG was the source of the idea of becoming a proxy by killing someone, as AW stated in the complaint.

I think AW really WANTED Slender Man to be real. To MG, he WAS real, and that combined with the turmoil regarding MG and PL's friendship enabled their justification for the attempted murder.

Other stuff...

The court records have an interesting addition: "from Vermilion Films regarding courtroom footage." Vermilion Films make documentaries. I was unable to find any reference on the Internet to their intention of doing so, but I can't imagine that there won't be a documentary in the works.

It also looks like MG and AW now have contested competency hearings on the same day - 18th December.
 
A lawyer for a Wisconsin girl accused of luring a classmate into the woods and repeatedly stabbing her to please Slenderman said on Tuesday his client still believes in the fictional Internet character and is unfit to stand trial.
Click to expand...

Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge Michael Bohren on Tuesday scheduled a Dec. 18 competency hearing for Geyser so that her attorney Anthony Cotton can challenge an expert report that found her mentally competent to stand trial.
Click to expand...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-wisconsin-girl-slenderman-20141118-story.html
 
This case got a mention in a recent episode of Criminal Minds, as an example of "legend-tripping" - people who seek to live out an actual fairytale.
 
Ausgirl said:
This case got a mention in a recent episode of Criminal Minds, as an example of "legend-tripping" - people who seek to live out an actual fairytale.
Click to expand...

Got me reading a bit - found a couple of links I hadn't seen before regarding this case. I think these terms have been mentioned before, but to reiterate, the articles I was reading mentioned "corrupted play", "shared agency" and "ostention", the latter in regard to legend tripping in particular.

In the corrupted play, the plot starts out as a game but this is not explicitly mentioned, and it becomes a game of chicken... who will be the first to say "enough"? If nobody does call it off, the "game" only stops after an irrevocable (and often tragic) consequence. It's taken on a life of it's own, as evidenced by AW: "...I though dear God, this was really happening...". Note not "...I/we are really doing this...". In other words, neither girl was taking responsibility.

This leads to the shared agency part, where the attack is shared between the two girls. In particular, MG saying "...I'm not going to until you tell me...". So AW orders but does not carry out the attack, while MG stabs but only when ordered. The attack would not have been carried out by either girl alone.

Ostention was really interesting. In the context of folklore, it means acting out in real life events described in the lore. But the motivation is not so clear - it seems to me that people act out these things not necessarily because they believe the lore to be true, but because they WANT it to be true. There is something about Slender Man that made not only these girls but many others also WANT the legend to be real. This seems to be possible even when the original story has clearly been shown not to be true. And really this is nothing new: cult and religious leaders have been taking advantage of this forever. Perhaps humans don't want to believe that "this is all there is", and that there is a higher power that will forever remain mysterious.

Both girls are due in court on the 18th - maybe we'll learn a little more.
 
The court records for MG has been updated with "requesting response sent to ADA".

Assuming that this means the Americans with Disabilities Act, one assumes that this concerns the protections that MG would have under that act with regard to her schizophrenia. For mental illnesses, one of these protections is "culture and age-appropriate treatment". I imagine that this would be a powerful reason to have MG's case transferred to the juvenile system.

I didn't realize this, but in the adult context, a significant proportion (5 - 8%) of violent crime is committed by sufferers of schizophrenia, who are either not diagnosed, or have not been receiving/taking their medication. From what I've read, such crime is almost entirely preventable if sufferers are receiving anti-psychotic medication. I imagine that MG's best-case scenario is at some future point to be released into society under heavy supervision (and medication)... possibly some years from now.

Not sure what the future holds for AW. The state has deemed that she is not only competent, but of well above-average intelligence. She does not, however, appear to have much "common sense" to apply to real-world situations, which is pretty much exactly what her older brother said. She apparently stated that she didn't know that she could have had a lawyer present prior to making a statement, otherwise she would have requested this. She appears to be "completely normal" from an outside point of view. I imagine that the prosecution will seek to discount the Slender Man angle as an excuse in her case, saying that she used the stories as a tool to achieve other goals, knowing MG to be susceptible to such beliefs.
 
Both are scheduled to appear in court tomorrow
 
"Preliminary hearings are often formalities but can sometimes become mini-trials complete with witness testimony. Judge Michael Bohren has set aside Monday and Tuesday for the hearing, suggesting it could be extensive. Court records indicate that prosecutors plan to call four witnesses, including a detective, on Monday. Questions for them are expected to consume the entire day."

http://www.wildabouttrial.com/one_o...girls-in-slender-man-stabbing/#comment-529145
 
Thanks for these updates, angelainwi!

It's going to be an interesting trial, I think, and also probably quite traumatic for the victim and families involved.
 
Ausgirl said:
Thanks for these updates, angelainwi!

It's going to be an interesting trial, I think, and also probably quite traumatic for the victim and families involved.
Click to expand...

If I were the parent of any of these girls I would hope there not be any trial at all. The assailants are obviously delusional. The victim has suffered and been traumatized enough. The two attckers need therapy and probable institutional care.

My 13 grandson showed me the slender man videos last year. They are creepy and scary. To believe he is real and those girls would like to join him --- that alone displays problems With their reasoning capabilities regardless of their age. They really believed they would live in the forest with him? Why would that be their fantasy versus living in plush hobbit house with a pool and flying horses and all the clothes and makeup and bling bling they could ever want and Justin bieber visits?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 227 more.
Total: 4,383 (members: 228, guests: 4,155)

Online statistics

Members online
228
Guests online
4,155
Total visitors
4,383
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,237
Messages
17,982,808
Members
229,060
Latest member
buybuyavto
Back
Top