Last week, Orange County Register columnist Frank Mickadeit publicized Marge Miller's attack on my work in the Haidl gang-rape case. Miller, who lives in Minneapolis and claims she is Greg Haidl's great-aunt, knows exactly who to blame for the July 2002 rape: the victim, Jane Doe, who was 16 and unconscious when Haidl, Keith Spann and Kyle Nachreiner videotaped themselves sexually assaulting her, vaginally and rectally, with, among other things, a Snapple bottle, lit cigarette, apple juice can and pool cue. The men were sentenced to six years in prison on March 10.
But maybe word hasn't gotten back to Minneapolis yet. Miller still sends me e-mails and–apparently believing she could embarrass me–forwarded copies of our recent exchange to Mickadeit. He quoted her calling me “a jerk,” asking me to “grow up” and insisting that I stop writing “biased crap” and “trash.”
“You make me sick,” Miller concluded.
My pal Mickadeit wasn't allowed to tell his readers the whole story, though. “I wish I could print Moxley's reply [directly to Miller], but at the last minute on deadline last night, an editor made me cut it,” he wrote in his March 16 column. “No problem with letting her rip Moxley.”
To aid psychiatrists, psychologists and the folks at the FBI's behavior sciences lab in their studies, I'm publishing Miller's e-mails from the course of the Haidl saga. They offer insights into why the Haidl family blamed the victim all the way until the day of sentencing. At the end of her 14 e-mails is my reply to her post-sentencing rant.
*”I am disgusted at your very biased reporting on the rape trial. It is obvious you have already condemned and sentenced the three young men. I see nothing in your article that in any way attributes some of the blame for this act to the girl. She went there willingly expecting group sex and got it. She is not a sweet little virgin as you make her out to be. This case has been blown out of all proportion due to Don Haidl's standing in the community. Why is it that all your reporting refers to 'Haidl' and not the other two boys? What is the meaning of your headline 'Haidl Your Daughters'? It makes no sense. These boys are not in any way a threat to society and should not be given jail time. There are hardened murderers and terrorists out there who are a threat to society and who do not get jail time like is proposed for these young boys. I'd also like to know where the Orange County Weekly got the tape to view and write so vividly about, when the people in the jury room were not allowed to see it? Please be more fair in your future reporting as journalists are supposed to be.” (May 9, 2004)
*”Where did you get the tape that you so vividely [sic] described in your article? It wasn't available to the jury room people so how did the OC Weekly get it? Also, what does this headline mean: Haidl Your Daughters? It makes no sense. You said I was biased for the defense. I can be biased. I am not a journalist who is supposed to just present the facts. Your are [sic] biased for the prosecution and it shows!!!” (May 10, 2004)
*”I just went on-line and read your article on the Haidl Rape case and again you are at it with your story entitled 'Faultless.' What is your point? Why don't you mention the other two boys involved instead of just Greg Haidl? What about little Jane Doe? I heard your magazine was sleazy and now I know where you got that reputation. What you print is sleazy. Why don't you go find another scapegoat other than Greg Haidl and where did you, Mr. Moxley, get all your eyewitness accounts of the tape that was not supposed to be available to the public? Do you have a copy of the tape or are you making all this up? I have a feeling you are making it up because the tape could not be as bad as you vividly describe. Get the facts before you write articles.” (May 13, 2004)
*”You are such an idiot. Doesn't say much for OC Weekly to have YOU on their staff. No, you did not get under my skin. You just think you did and that shows how stupid you are. I just know you are a liar and an exaggerator—trying to get porno readers I guess. Suppose that is all who read your rag. I don't! Happened to find it (your rag) on internet and noticed you were out of line in your reporting. Of course, sleazy magazines hire sleazy reporters so guess that is why you have a job. You won't find this high class person reading your rag again. Don't cry! You have enough sleazy people reading it.” (May 14, 2004)
*”You remind me of a 13-year-old who just discovered smut and likes to talk dirty. Grow up!” (May 14, 2004)
*”Moxley, you are so obnoxious. Your language is filthy! You claim [pro-Haidl defense Los Angeles Times columnist] Dana Parsons did not see the tape. Where did you see it? Jane Doe was and is a slut as Attorney Joe Cavallo pegged her. She was not a victim but a willing participant who is in this for money—the money she intends to sue the Haidl family for. You are a weazel [sic] and a dirt bag and also very stupid that you cannot see through Jane Doe.” (July 6, 2004)
*”My son is a Police Lieutenant and one is a College Professor. How about you jerk?” (July 6, 2004)
*”Like I said my sons are 1. a Police officer and 2. a College Professor. Your are [sic] a slime.” (July 6, 2004)
*”SLIME.” (July 6, 2004)
*”I think it [Haidl's arrest for statutory rape of another underage girl he met at his family's celebration of the deadlocked jury in the first gang-rape trial] was a set up. I think that DA has a tail on Greg Haidl and the call for a barking dog was a hoax. It was just a reason to get in that house and find Greg doing what all young guys do. If we arrest every kid having sex, there will be a lot of kids in jail.” (July 16, 2004)
*”OK, Scott, let's see how fair your OC Weekly is. Start reporting on little Miss Jane Doe and how she has been arrested twice in the last month for possession, selling and using Meth. This was in the San Bernardino County Sun on 11/11/04. Funny you only go after Greg. Let's start seeing some articles in your RAG about her. She went to the Haidl home on the night of the alleged rape uninvited. She is no little saint. Find out if she is living at home. I read one report where she stated her parents had kicked her out because of her drug use. Maybe you can look into this and see if it is true and start giving people the other side of Jane Doe AKA The Women Libbers Little Star. Also quit insinuating in your articles that because Greg was skateboarding at a closed, previously vandalized public property that he and his friends were the ones who vandalized it. This is not true at all. By what you are omitting in your articles you are trying to make people believe. No wonder you work for a second rate so-called paper.” (Nov. 14, 2004)
*”When are you going to start printing the truth Scott? Little Jane Doe went to the Haidl's UN-invited. Get that straight but then you don't recognize the truth unless it hits you in the ass and even then you have a hard time. Tsk, Tsk. Shame on you 100# weakling. How do you hold down your job? Get a life.” (Nov. 14, 2004)
*”You got it wrong again! Greg was NOT found with a stash of Marijuana. It was in a vehicle that did NOT belong to Greg. Greg denied it was HIS, another kid said it was his and not Greg's. How can you print such lies and sleep at night? Just what is your point in trying to portray Greg as some kind of animal? Grow up.” (Dec. 6, 2004)
*”You are such a jerk Moxley. Grow up. Try honest reporting for once instead of biased crap that you usually come up with. This is America where everyone should be entitled to fair reporting—not the trash you put out. You make me sick.” (March 13, 2006)
And here's my March 13 reply to Miller:
You've claimed (in the uneducated style that's all yours) that I was wrong about the heart of the case. Now we have not only the judge but each of the defendants acknowledging in public that they knew the girl was unconscious and are responsible for this crime. Only pathetic assholes like you continue to defend a lie. And trust me: I'm going to continue to do exactly what I always have done—expose sick, disgusting people like you.