Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

NFT: 20 Yr Old found guilty: Involuntary manslaughter by texting

gidiefor : Mod : 6/16/2017 12:39 pm
Quote:
(CNN) In a case that hinged largely on a teenage couple's intimate text messages, Michelle Carter was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter Friday in the 2014 death of her boyfriend, who poisoned himself by inhaling carbon monoxide in his pickup truck, a Massachusetts judge ruled.


- more -
Link - ( New Window )
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
RE: Judges are swayed by emotion just like anyone else  
santacruzom : 6/16/2017 6:36 pm : link
In comment 13502118 Vanzetti said:
Quote:
Doubt you would get that verdict in Alabama.


Not exactly something Alabama would wear as a badge of honor, I'd think.
RE: RE: If he did it by himself she'd be walking away from this  
santacruzom : 6/16/2017 6:52 pm : link
In comment 13502155 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 13502150 jcn56 said:


Quote:


I'd swear some of you would blame a poison victim because after all, he ate the poisoned food himself, nobody forced him.



If he ate it knowingly? Sure.


How about someone who shot himself during a round of a Russian Roulette game orchestrated by others? Do the others have culpability?

That's an actual case where the defendants were found guilty, under the same "wanton or reckless conduct" reasoning if I'm not mistaken.
RE: RE: Judges are swayed by emotion just like anyone else  
jcn56 : 6/16/2017 7:01 pm : link
In comment 13502374 santacruzom said:
Quote:
In comment 13502118 Vanzetti said:


Quote:


Doubt you would get that verdict in Alabama.



Not exactly something Alabama would wear as a badge of honor, I'd think.


Even if, I'm not sure Alabama is some great bastion of justice that the rest of the country should line up to follow...
she's the devil...  
Bchurch : 6/16/2017 7:04 pm : link
that kids poor family.. She could have saved him. Makes me so angry!
RE: RE: RE: If he did it by himself she'd be walking away from this  
Bchurch : 6/16/2017 7:09 pm : link
In comment 13502172 jcn56 said:
Quote:
In comment 13502155 Greg from LI said:


Quote:


In comment 13502150 jcn56 said:


Quote:


I'd swear some of you would blame a poison victim because after all, he ate the poisoned food himself, nobody forced him.



If he ate it knowingly? Sure.




Yes - even knowingly - the person responsible belongs in prison. Without their actions, the victim would not be dead.

This one's really not that complicated. Yes, there are times where people go to great lengths to find someone to blame for something bad happening. This isn't one of them.


I wrote my response and then went back to read what other people on here were saying. Wow... yes he's a grown man, he makes his own decisions but obviously he was battling some severe demons and depression. She gave him the push he needed to go over the edge. She is absolutely guilty and pure evil.
You don't have to help anyone  
Dirt1 : 6/16/2017 9:32 pm : link
that's what this country is all about, at least according to Jackie Charles!
Link - ( New Window )
On the fence  
UConn4523 : 6/16/2017 9:42 pm : link
but the mental health aspect can't be ignored. It's easy to say he could have easily told her to fuck off and then hung up, but this isn't me or you it's an unstable person who was extremely fragile.

I feel she should be found guilty, just no idea what sentence is be comfortable with.
Some posters here really showing their ass  
David in LA : 6/16/2017 10:26 pm : link
when it comes to being a bit sympathetic to mental health issues. I would certainly bet some of you would be whistling a different tune if this happened to your kid.
Seriously wonder what goes through someone's head  
David in LA : 6/16/2017 10:29 pm : link
When they are suggesting all we need is more onus of personal responsibility, but sweeping aside the fact that the person who committed suicide is mentally incapacitated and vulnerable to suggestion of killing themselves.
She obviously has some issues as well  
buford : 6/17/2017 6:54 am : link
and I don't think she should get a 20 year sentence, but she did contribute to his death, deliberately.

Many people who have depression or other issues kill themselves without anyone pushing them to do so, so the whole 'personal responsibility' thing doesn't apply here. If you knew someone was on the edge, would you buy them a gun or give them a bunch of pills, or causally tell them to kill themselves? No, of course you wouldn't. But this woman went further, she encouraged and pushed and gave him advice on how to do it. She's guilty as hell.
She is a sick evil bitch  
bigblue1124 : 6/17/2017 8:23 am : link
And society is much better off with her off the streets IMV.
From everything I've read, what drove the verdict  
jcn56 : 6/17/2017 8:28 am : link
wasn't even that she pushed him to do it, it's that she knew he was taking his life and stood by and not only did nothing to stop it, but encouraged him to go forward.

Had she shown even a bit of human decency and called the authorities or family, she'd probably walk away from this.
She is a sociopath predator  
bigblue1124 : 6/17/2017 8:56 am : link
I would hate to see how she would treat someone she didnít like. And it is very surprising to see some of the comments here. My guess if it happened to someone you knew or loved youíre tune would change.
Story was on Dateline last night  
pjcas18 : 6/17/2017 9:30 am : link
according to the show one key text to the judge was this series:

First she asks him if he "deleted the texts" (and he did) and second


Carter said to a friend (post-suicide) something to the effect of "they're going to search his phone and if they find the texts...

Quote:
I'm done,' Carter wrote in one text displayed in the court room. 'His family will hate me and I can go to jail.'


I think it's a shitty story, the kid had severe mental problems but the girl definitely is guilty of something.

people who equate this to someone saying "go jump off a bridge" or say he's a grown man and needs to accept responsibility are way off base.
While I can see where many of you are coming from  
RC02XX : 6/17/2017 10:50 am : link
Regarding each individual taking ownership for his/her actions, not everything dealing with human psyche and emotions is as black and white as some of you make it out to be.

There have been numerous instances of strong willed individuals being convinced to act in manners counter to societal norms because they were influenced by others preying on their emotions and psyche. Since beginning of society, humans have waged psychological warfare on each other in one form another. And in many instances, they've been successful against individuals and large groups alike.

Now apply that kind of persistent psychological attack against an individual with a history of emotional sand psychological issues as well as suicidal thoughts, and you are creating a recipe for disaster. Put an emotional attachment of the victim to his/her abuser, and that disaster becomes almost a certainty.

This isn't about what you think you would have or haven't done. This is about a young emotionally and psychologically damaged individual being tormented by someone he thought cared about him that he found emotional attachment to, as crazy as that sounds to many of you. So while you may have been stronger in such a case with your own emotional and psychological state, this individual was not you with such grounded view of the world.

Sometimes you have to a step back and look through the perspective of others instead of your own insulated perspective.
Good post, Ronnie  
Moondawg : 6/17/2017 10:52 am : link
.
Incidentally, while we often see acts of rage, selfishnes and violence  
Moondawg : 6/17/2017 11:03 am : link
It's often not the case that these are evil. But this woman comes off as evil.
I think why people are reacting negatively to the verdict  
Vanzetti : 6/17/2017 2:02 pm : link
is the principle involved. Nobody has expressed any sympathy for the young woman and most agree what she did is terrible and she seems like a horrible human being.

But once you allow "mental incapacity" to be invoked for psychological issues, you are on the slippery slope. What about anxiety disorders, PTSD, chronic depression, Chronic Fatigue, Fybromyalgia? Or whatever new disorders will be discovered in the future.

If someone is severely autistic or has some severe form of incapacity,then this verdict makes sense. But if "depression" can be cited as indicating mental incapacity, then you are opening a whole new can of worms. Granted, what she did was extreme but the way our court system works is through precedents. This case can now be cited as a precedent in a case where the circumstances are less extreme and that starts the ball rolling down the hill.

I do not want this young woman to get off scot free. What she did was truly terrible. But you have to look at principle involved and citing depression or emotional turmoil as a form of mental incapacity is a really bad precedent to set.
that's why there is a crime  
pjcas18 : 6/17/2017 2:12 pm : link
called involuntary manslaughter.

If the circumstances were different the charge would have been more serious.
Surprised at  
Natek212 : 6/17/2017 3:25 pm : link
the number of people saying she should not go to jail for this. We're clearly dealing with a fragile, mentally disturbed man. He clearly had reservations about killing himself, and ultimately wasn't going to do it, but she was adamant about making sure he went through with it.

If you don't want to charge her with manslaughter, fine. But this woman needs to go to prison for something. This is not behavior that should be acceptable under the law. She was fully aware someone was in the middle of taking their own life, and not only did she do nothing to prevent it, she helped him, persuaded him, and even guilted him to go through with it. Absolutely despicable.

It doesn't open a can of worms either. This wasn't one or two angry, careless texts, or even bullying. This was a woman actively pushing this man to commit suicide, fully aware of what she was doing.
RE: that's why there is a crime  
Deej : 6/17/2017 3:33 pm : link
In comment 13502825 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
called involuntary manslaughter.

If the circumstances were different the charge would have been more serious.


Is it? Usually IM is just the opposite -- the person charged actually did the killing, but lacked intent to cause death. An unintentional killing from recklessness or negligence or a misdemeanor act that causes death. Some places call it criminally negligent homicide. So lets say you're intentionally fucking around behind the wheel, cause a crash, and someone dies. You had the necessary intent to act (the driving), it was reckless, but you didnt intended to kill or cause death.

IM seems like a poor fit.
Question  
Deej : 6/17/2017 3:39 pm : link
lets say instead of being a bitch, she was a dear friend who talked to a sick and deeply unhappy friend (lets say cancer) and convinced the friend that suicide was an okay option. Criminal? What about a doctor who physically aides a terminal patient in committing suicide? Criminal?

There are some really good reasons that the law has generally held that suicide breaks the causal chain. I expect this to get a thorough looking over on appeal. He sentence should be suspended pending appeal IMO given the substantial possibility of reversal.

[also people keep calling here a woman. She was 17 at the time of the crime. Pretend all you want that 17 year olds are fully functional adults with good judgment.]
What about a suicide pact where someone gets cold feet?  
Deej : 6/17/2017 3:43 pm : link
What about an asshole who yells "just do it" as someone stands on the edge of a roof?

What about someone who was merely indifferent in the face of suicidal expressions?

I get why this case with gross facts makes people want justice, but I think the notion of causing another person, not in your care/charge, to commit suicide is a very dangerous path for the law.
Deej  
UConn4523 : 6/17/2017 4:03 pm : link
it wasn't a single text though. It was a series of texts over many weeks not someone just yelling "jump" while passing by a bridge. She should absolutely go to jail, how long is the hard part.
This likely overturned  
section125 : 6/17/2017 4:22 pm : link
on appeal. Might be the most ridiculous decision I've ever heard.
this was assisted suicide  
fkap : 6/17/2017 4:26 pm : link
all the way through. and it is a prime example of why assisted suicide should only happen under the auspices of licensed professionals. that's a bare minimum. This crossed over into the kill zone.

this was in no way, shape, or form any way analogous to saying go jump off a bridge. get real. this was a woman who helped someone plan his death, pressured him into doing it, and actively assisted him in committing it, including the very damning instructions to get back in the truck and finish it. Physically, she didn't do it, he did. in every other aspect, she's a killer.

I am all in favor of the right to commit suicide. I am not in favor of having someone encouraging another to do it, and putting pressure on that other to do it. her emotional weapons were just as real as physical force.
Why do you think  
pjcas18 : 6/17/2017 4:29 pm : link
she said in text to a third party "if they check his cell phone and see the texts I'm done". "His family will hate me and I could go to jail".

So apparently she grasped the fact she played a role in his death even if some of you do not.
RE: Why do you think  
Deej : 6/17/2017 4:33 pm : link
In comment 13502895 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
she said in text to a third party "if they check his cell phone and see the texts I'm done". "His family will hate me and I could go to jail".

So apparently she grasped the fact she played a role in his death even if some of you do not.


Who is arguing that she didnt play a role in his death? The question is whether she is criminally culpable for manslaughter for another person committing suicide.
As usual  
TEPLimey : 6/17/2017 4:34 pm : link
Deej right on the money
RE: RE: Why do you think  
pjcas18 : 6/17/2017 4:36 pm : link
In comment 13502899 Deej said:
Quote:
In comment 13502895 pjcas18 said:


Quote:


she said in text to a third party "if they check his cell phone and see the texts I'm done". "His family will hate me and I could go to jail".

So apparently she grasped the fact she played a role in his death even if some of you do not.



Who is arguing that she didnt play a role in his death? The question is whether she is criminally culpable for manslaughter for another person committing suicide.


So then in your opinion she played a role in his death, but not a criminally culpable one?

Not sure I get the distinction. When is it ok to play a role in someone's death and have no consequences for that role?

She, the defendant, felt there could be jail for her actions, so again, I'll rephrase it, she felt her contribution to his death was criminally culpable even if you and your fan club don't.
RE: RE: RE: Why do you think  
Deej : 6/17/2017 4:59 pm : link
In comment 13502901 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
In comment 13502899 Deej said:


Quote:


In comment 13502895 pjcas18 said:


Quote:


she said in text to a third party "if they check his cell phone and see the texts I'm done". "His family will hate me and I could go to jail".

So apparently she grasped the fact she played a role in his death even if some of you do not.



Who is arguing that she didnt play a role in his death? The question is whether she is criminally culpable for manslaughter for another person committing suicide.



So then in your opinion she played a role in his death, but not a criminally culpable one?

Not sure I get the distinction. When is it ok to play a role in someone's death and have no consequences for that role?

She, the defendant, felt there could be jail for her actions, so again, I'll rephrase it, she felt her contribution to his death was criminally culpable even if you and your fan club don't.


I think the distinction is fairly simple. Merely because someone is a but-for cause in the causation chain, here thru encouragement (at least), does not mean that we decide they are the legal cause. 3 guys standing in a bar. X says to Y "you should totally kick the shit out of Z". Y had never thought about it before, but decided to kick the shit out of Z then and there. Is X guilty of a crime? What if X, a bitter rival of Z, had come to the bar to show Y evidence that Z was banging Mrs. Y, and X was hoping that this would make Y receptive to a suggestion of an ass kicking. Criminal? The law must draw a line somewhere that says "that wouldnt have happened without you, but you're still not criminally responsible". US Supreme Court precedent allows the criminalization of fighting words and other incitements to violence, but our law has moved much more towards an absolutist view of the 1st Amendment since WWII (especially the Roberts court).

Here I have no opinion formally, because I dont know all the facts. As a general matter I am pretty skeptical of the conviction. Barring a legal duty to this guy (e.g. she was his guardian), I am troubled by the idea of saying one person committed manslaughter by merely berating/convincing a person to commit suicide. It's a shitty thing to do, but if we hold her responsible for this suicide (based on extreme facts), where is the line drawn?

The fact that she felt like she could go to jail for this is relevant to her guilty conscience/intent. It's not relevant to whether she is the proximate/legal cause of Roy's death. Much like an idiot selling oregano who thinks it is pot has not trafficked in controlled substances (note there may be statutes re drug look alikes).
.  
pjcas18 : 6/17/2017 5:12 pm : link
In your analogy above a better example (but still not perfect) would be if person x says to person y I'll give you $50 to beat the shit out of person z and person z dies as a result of the beating - more direct than the abstract like you describe.

and on top of it while person z is dying person x knows person z is dying but not yet dead (could possibly be revived) and makes no effort to seek help for person z allowing them to die.

The defendant was aware of her actions effect on the victim, she had intent with her actions, and was even blatantly aware of the consequences. This could be turned over on appeal really because it's new ground IMO, but I don't have to struggle even a little to see how someone should be jailed for her actions and she didn't have to struggle to see it either, she anticipated it.

this is not a case where the defendant could claim "I had no idea he'd die from that" or "I didn't want him to die" it's exactly what she wanted and exactly what she thought would happen.
I dont like you changing it to a payment  
Deej : 6/17/2017 5:20 pm : link
that's assault for hire. Clear precedent that you're guilty of murder for hiring a hitman.

Im not broken up about her going to jail. I have real slippery slope concerns. What if your daughter's boyfriend says "if you break up with me I'll kill myself". Does she have to say with him?

I guess if there was evidence that she had some sort of effective control over him I'd hear the case. I would certainly say that talking someone who was mentally disabled into committing suicide has the hallmarks of a crime. So Im not an absolutist here. It's why I dont have a position on this case -- I'd need to know a lot about the boy, the girl, and their relationship.
RE: I dont like you changing it to a payment  
pjcas18 : 6/17/2017 5:45 pm : link
In comment 13502930 Deej said:
Quote:
that's assault for hire. Clear precedent that you're guilty of murder for hiring a hitman.

Im not broken up about her going to jail. I have real slippery slope concerns. What if your daughter's boyfriend says "if you break up with me I'll kill myself". Does she have to say with him?

I guess if there was evidence that she had some sort of effective control over him I'd hear the case. I would certainly say that talking someone who was mentally disabled into committing suicide has the hallmarks of a crime. So Im not an absolutist here. It's why I dont have a position on this case -- I'd need to know a lot about the boy, the girl, and their relationship.


I think you should read up on this case. I didn't until I saw the Dateline special on it last night.

This is not a simple case of if you break up with me I'll kill myself or go jump off a bridge.

this was hundreds of texts, including when he expressed fears of the act of committing suicide she reassured him it would be fine and was his best choice, when he expressed remorse toward how his family would feel she assured him his family would eventually accept it, when he actually got out of the car filling up with carbon monoxide because he was fearful and couldn't breathe she urged him back into the car.

She helped him with the method, she pushed him to this end (and it didn't start out that way, she initially befriended him and said she'd help him out of his depression).

she knew his mental state, she knew he was impaired and when he dropped the phone due to being overtaken by the fumes and lay dying in his truck she did nothing but listen to his gasping breaths.

Maybe slightly extreme but I almost view him as autistic or otherwise unable to act responsibly on his behalf - I don't mean to offend autistic parents I use that as an example only because in his mental state I do not believe he was capable of knowing right from wrong and the defendant 100% knew this. Not sure I agree with the prosecution on her motive, but I haven't read enough about her outside of this case to know if I buy that or not.

the judge viewed her actions as reckless and negligent and warranting the charge involuntary manslaughter. I agree.

I think if this went to jury they would not have deliberated very long and reached the same conclusion.

It is a slippery slope, but one where I feel like this case it passes the reasonable man theory. And I don't think every case will, but this one does.
Deej  
UConn4523 : 6/17/2017 6:47 pm : link
in that example, no. People threatenthing to kill themselves in a breakup scenario isn't uncommon. I don't think anyone walking away from a relationship should be held responsible as they were the ones being threatened with the guilt.

This girl was the aggressor and made him feel guilty for not killing himself. Big difference, imo.
Some very odd concerns about "slippery slope" here  
Mike from Ohio : 6/18/2017 9:20 am : link
You do realize that the precedent set here involves someone encouraging someone to kill themselves over a long period of time, chastising them for not doing it, listening to them finally do it, and finally not contacting anyone to stop it. If you think this now sets precedent that everyone who hears someone threaten suicide is ultimately legally responsible for their death...well, I don't know what to tell you other that that is not how the law works. This is why we still have individual trials where specific facts and circumstances are presented. Yelling "go kill yourself" did not just become a criminal act.

And for those who believe if she didn't hold a gun to his head to force him to do it, I'd ask this. Charles Manson was convicted of the Tate murders even though he was not present and did not murder anyone in that house. In hindsight, do you think he is not legally responsible for those murders because he only encouraged those who committed the crimes do do them? Or are there cases where someone manipulating others can be held responsible (other than holding a gun to their head)?
Mike from Ohio  
fkap : 6/18/2017 9:27 am : link
nice post
It's not a slippery slope  
pjcas18 : 6/18/2017 9:48 am : link
because of whether or not people feel she contributed to or was responsible for his death, it's a slippery slope because manslaughter has never (from what I know) extended to a situation when the defendant was not present at the death. ever, as far as I know. It also never extended to words/texts. EVER. (from what I know).

So the term slippery slope now means either this case could serve as precedent for future prosecutions or new and/or unintended situations can qualify as involuntary manslaughter.

The slippery slope has zero to do with her role, but the legal precedent, so if you don't get that, it's on you and Deej and I are on opposite sides of the outcome but both see how the decision creates a slippery slope for future cases.

Charles Manson is completely irrelevant - that was not a suicide by anyone's definition, he's more akin to the examples already discussed above.

To top it all off, Massachusetts is one of the few states that does NOT have any laws against assisting in or encouraging suicide (aka they are assisted suicide friendly).

Has a motive for why she did this ever come out?  
montanagiant : 6/18/2017 6:25 pm : link
She sat there telling him he's the love of her life while encouraging him to die..WTF?
RE: Has a motive for why she did this ever come out?  
pjcas18 : 6/18/2017 8:09 pm : link
In comment 13503408 montanagiant said:
Quote:
She sat there telling him he's the love of her life while encouraging him to die..WTF?


The prosecution said she wanted the attention of being the grieving "girlfriend" which I find plausible in general, and I think her actions post suicide help the point, but I don't know the defendant well enough and didn't see enough evidence to to say if that's 100% legit.
pjcas  
fkap : 6/18/2017 8:21 pm : link
she was present enough to talk him through it as he was doing it, including telling him to 'get back in the truck' and get it done, and hear his last breath. She was in a personal live time connection with him throughout.
RE: pjcas  
pjcas18 : 6/18/2017 8:23 pm : link
In comment 13503464 fkap said:
Quote:
she was present enough to talk him through it as he was doing it, including telling him to 'get back in the truck' and get it done, and hear his last breath. She was in a personal live time connection with him throughout.


this is a new definition of present, the judge even commented on her being "virtually present".

There are multiple links around talking about the uniqueness of the case.

I believe the verdict was correct, but I do see how it could be groundbreaking or at worst present a slipper slope with future decisions about prosecution.
pj - will agree to disagree on the "slippery slope" take  
Mike from Ohio : 6/19/2017 9:38 am : link
The way some here have presented it, telling someone to kill themselves is the slippery slope argument which to me is silly. If your take is more nuanced (as I read it) to say "now you can be guilty of manslaughter if you are not physically present" - there may be some validity to that. I was reacting to the more silly extensions that were being posted on this thread.

And the Manson reference was not addressing suicide/homicide specifically. It was addressing the point "how could she make him do something unless she held a gun to his head." There is precedent to show you can be guilty of a crime physically committed by others outside of your presence based on your influence over them.
I keep reading about how this guy was mentally fragile, depressed  
Greg from LI : 6/19/2017 9:47 am : link
etc etc as reasons why he's not responsible for his own actions. Would that standard be applied to someone who committed a crime? Would they be considered blameless for killing someone else if they had been encouraging to kill in a depressed, fragile mental condition? How do you quantify such a thing? How do you determine the degree at which someone is now considered mentally incapacitated to the point of being incapable of making their own decisions?
RE: RE: Has a motive for why she did this ever come out?  
montanagiant : 6/19/2017 9:54 am : link
In comment 13503459 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
In comment 13503408 montanagiant said:


Quote:


She sat there telling him he's the love of her life while encouraging him to die..WTF?



The prosecution said she wanted the attention of being the grieving "girlfriend" which I find plausible in general, and I think her actions post suicide help the point, but I don't know the defendant well enough and didn't see enough evidence to to say if that's 100% legit.

Thanks Pj, a warped version of Munchhausen
RE: I keep reading about how this guy was mentally fragile, depressed  
RC02XX : 6/19/2017 9:56 am : link
In comment 13503625 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
etc etc as reasons why he's not responsible for his own actions. Would that standard be applied to someone who committed a crime? Would they be considered blameless for killing someone else if they had been encouraging to kill in a depressed, fragile mental condition? How do you quantify such a thing? How do you determine the degree at which someone is now considered mentally incapacitated to the point of being incapable of making their own decisions?


I'm not sure that many people are saying he isn't responsible for his own actions. However, neither are many of us stating that she's completely absolved of her not only abhorrent but criminal (in some of our opinions) actions. They're not mutually exclusive.

Whether you think she is criminally responsible or not, you have to be living in a black and white world to completely dismiss her part in this man's suicide. To state that he was in total control of his actions is negating any play that mental illness has on one's susceptibility to psychological abuse by someone, who the individual formed an emotional bond with. It's a fucked up case that can't just be oversimplified by stating "he's a grown man, his actions were his own." That's not how human emotions, psyche, and mental illness work.
Of course she played a huge part  
Greg from LI : 6/19/2017 10:00 am : link
I've said over and over again that she's a reprehensible person.

Not guilty of manslaughter, though.
RE: Of course she played a huge part  
RC02XX : 6/19/2017 10:06 am : link
In comment 13503643 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
I've said over and over again that she's a reprehensible person.

Not guilty of manslaughter, though.


With regards to the whole criminal case and verdict, I think we all have our own differing opinions on this one. Probably more so because it's so fucked up.
pj and Deej's posts summed up my feelings pretty well  
Greg from LI : 6/19/2017 10:14 am : link
Involuntary manslaughter is a charge appropriate to reckless behavior that resulting in the death of another but was not intended to harm anyone. An example that comes to mind was the nightclub fire a while back at a Great White show, when pyrotechnics that were part of the show sparked a fire that killed a hundred people. The club owners and the band manager were both tried for involuntary manslaughter.

This is something different. If anything, voluntary manslaughter makes more sense because it was her intent for him to commit suicide. Even then, however, I see her actions as disgusting but not criminal.
Greg  
Mike from Ohio : 6/19/2017 10:17 am : link
I think it comes down to what she knew about him, and what her intent was. She knew he was suicidal for a long time, so she knew he was vulnerable. I don't think you can prove that to a certain threshold, but if she told someone she didn't know was suicidal to go kill themselves and they did, I don't think you would have gotten this verdict.

It seems her intent all along was to encourage a person she knew was suicidal to go through with it. She didn't plant the idea, and she didn't physically force him to do it, but she played a very active part in it, all the way through the actual moment he died.

Generally I agree with you that people are responsible for their own actions. But I think it is reasonable to conclude in this case that she knew he was suicidal, and she did everything she could to make sure he went through with it. Is manslughter the right charge? I don't know for sure.
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner