Girl who convinced friend to committ suicide found guilty of involuntary manslaughter

MilesMorales1

Think there's been a thread on this before on AH.

A Massachusetts judge found Michelle Carter, 20, guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the 2014 death of her boyfriend, who poisoned himself by inhaling carbon monoxide in his pickup truck. Prosecutors had said she sent Conrad Roy III, 18, numerous text messages urging him to commit suicide.

The case was built largely on Michelle Carter's own words, in the form of hundreds of texts messages exchanged with a vulnerable young man who killed himself in July 2014 by inhaling carbon monoxide in his pickup truck.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/16/us/michelle-carter-texting-case/index.html


Good, its disgusting, and she has a bizarre lack of empathy. Stuff like that is not ok, to say to anyone verbally or via text.

Rothko

Don't know how it could be considered involuntary when she pushed him to kill himself.

valoren

If you happened upon someone standing on a ledge at a height, you should have the common sense to realize that it is irrational behavior and that person is more than likely suicidal. Any empathetic person would choose their words carefully (if at all), the crux of which would be to not jump. They would seek help.

If you had the vindictiveness to voluntarily advise that person to 'Jump!' and they subsequently did so, then you are guilty of causing their death no matter how you look at it, you have negatively influenced a vulnerable person unnecessarily.

Looks like this case will set legal precedent to that effect. She has been charged with involuntary manslaughter according to current laws. It now seems set to be changed.

MilesMorales1

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/08/us/text-message-suicide-michelle-carter-conrad-roy/index.html

Transcript!

Roy: "I'm just to sensitive. I want my family to know there was nothing they could do. I am entrapped in my own thoughts"
Roy: "like no I would be happy if they had no guilt about it. because I have a bad feeling tht this is going to create a lot of depression between my parents/sisters"
Roy: "i'm overthinking everything. . f**k. I gotta stop and just do it"
Carter: "I think your parents know you're in a really bad place. Im not saying they want you to do it, but I honestly feel like they can accept it. They know there's nothing they can do, they've tried helping, everyone's tried. But there's a point that comes where there isn't anything anyone can do to save you, not even yourself, and you've hit that point and I think your parents know you've hit that point. You said you're mom saw a suicide thing on your computer and she didn't say anything. I think she knows it's on your mind and she's prepared for it"
Carter: Everyone will be sad for a while, but they will get over it and move on. They won't be in depression I won't let that happen. They know how sad you are and they know that you're doing this to be happy, and I think they will understand and accept it. They'll always carry u in their hearts"

Carter: "You better not be bull sh*ting me and saying you're gonna do this and then purposely get caught"

yerwanthere123

She deserves a sentence of some form alright but I don't think it should be twenty years.

munster87

'friend'

Jesus Wept

I remember this from last year. Grim. Wonder what's going on with her.

Jesus Wept

munster87 wrote: »

'friend'

Fiend

Valmont

This is all tied up in the fact that while supposedly legal, suicide is simply not allowed. If you tell someone you're going to kill yourself, odds are you'll be banged up in a police cell or the local inpatient mental health centre. So while we can't say this woman caused this man to kill himself, her central role in a de facto proscribed act ensured some charges would be brought against her, based on moral outrage if anything. A jail sentence seems a bit harsh though.

AMKC

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

She deserves a sentence of some form alright but I don't think it should be twenty years.

She forced a vulnerable young man to take his life. He was at a very low point in his life and instead of helping him she took advantage of him by telling him to commit suicide which led to him taking his own life.
I think she deserves life.
If you take or force someone to take there life then you should serve the rest of your life in prison.

Nonsense verdict.

AMKC

AMKC wrote: »

She forced a vulnerable young man to take his life. He was at a very low point in his life and instead of helping him she took advantage of him by telling him to commit suicide which led to him taking his own life.
I think she deserves life.
If you take or force someone to take there life then you should serve the rest of your life in prison.

Was it really a case of "forced" or "asked"?

I think life sentences should be reserved for murder or serious aggravated crimes. Not asking someone to do something, even though it can make one a pretty horrific person. Ultimately he made the decision and he did the act, I'm not sure about this attempt to pass the buck at all.

freshpopcorn

I think she thought she was cleverer than she actually was to be honest. Teenage girls can be very silly in situations like this even tough people say that girls are more mature in my experience they often aren't.

wakka12

hope she rots in hell, Id have more respect for a murderer than her

wakka12

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

She deserves a sentence of some form alright but I don't think it should be twenty years.

I agree 20 years just seems to much but honestly I couldn't give a rats ass wtf happens her , deserving of absolutely no sympathy whatsoever

Sweetemotion

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Was it really a case of "forced" or "asked"?

I think life sentences should be reserved for murder or serious aggravated crimes. Not asking someone to do something, even though it can make one a pretty horrific person. Ultimately he made the decision and he did the act, I'm not sure about this attempt to pass the buck at all.

He got out of the car because he could feel the carbon monoxide working. She told him to get back in and you call that passing the buck?

Delighted she was found guilty.

pangbang

I can see this is a text message thing, but I'd put money on it that social media probably played a large part in this.

The pressure that younger people are under today with the way the world is going, must be compressed 10 fold by social media. The stories you hear, even personally, about the carry on in schools/colleges via facebook and twitter and such!

I'm sure that in (many) years to come, our present day "communications" will be viewed as a "digital" disease that caused untold human strife.

Parents today.........wouldn't want to be them.

Little rant might not be related to this case, but whatever.

pauliebdub

A truly dispicable girl to goad a vulnerable young man into taking his own life. The transcript of what she said is very cruel. I hope she gets the maximum time allowable, 20 years.

tinpib

This is a headline writer's wet dream and some of the texts do sound bad, but like all cases I think you really would need to hear all the evidence before being able to make a call on it.

The jury did and found her guilty. Like in the majority of cases I'm sure they made the correct decision.

Jesus Wept

Deleted User wrote: »

Was it really a case of "forced" or "asked"?

I think life sentences should be reserved for murder or serious aggravated crimes. Not asking someone to do something, even though it can make one a pretty horrific person. Ultimately he made the decision and he did the act, I'm not sure about this attempt to pass the buck at all.

She hasn't been sentenced yet?

Jesus Wept

Jesus Wept wrote: »

She hasn't been sentenced yet?

Oh I appreciate that. Was responding to poster who said she deserved life, I was saying it should be reserved for murder and rare cases, not telling someone to do something. If she told him to go jump in a lake, I wonder would she be convicted of homicide or swimming.

Surely it'll be overturned, the article suggests that despite the notoriously broad definition of homicide there academics are concerned.

Obviously it wouldn't even be considered in Ireland.

meeeeh

tinpib wrote: »

This is a headline writer's wet dream and some of the texts do sound bad, but like all cases I think you really would need to hear all the evidence before being able to make a call on it.

The jury did and found her guilty. Like in the majority of cases I'm sure they made the correct decision.

It was a non jury trial. I think like in all the cases you would have to inform yourself about the case before commenting on it.

Anyway I think it's about time bullying (and this was a form of bullying) is properly recognized for the damage it can do. That being said she seems to be suicidal and messed up herself and I am not sure locking her up for 20 years would make any sense. We'll see what actual sentence is.

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

It was a non jury trial. I think like in all the cases you would have to inform yourself about the case before commenting on it.

And the law in that State, which is clearly far broader than any concept of murder or manslaughter on this side of the Atlantic.

Minderbinder

I don't think the girl fully comprehended the magnitude of the situation. At that age it's not easy to have an awareness of our responsibility towards other people. Children and teenagers are incredibly selfish. They don't foresee the impact that their words or actions can have because they don't have a fully developed frontal lobe.

While what she said was despicable I would be more inclined to judge it as an extreme form of bullying.

DrPhilG

Minderbinder wrote: »

I don't think the girl fully comprehended the magnitude of the situation. At that age it's not easy to have an awareness of our responsibility towards other people.

She was 17, not 7.

She knew this guy was on the edge and willingly encouraged him over it.

Minderbinder

DrPhilG wrote: »

Minderbinder wrote: »

I don't think the girl fully comprehended the magnitude of the situation. At that age it's not easy to have an awareness of our responsibility towards other people.

She was 17, not 7.

She knew this guy was on the edge and willingly encouraged him over it.

The frontal lobe isn't fully developed until the late 20's though and 17 is a kid. I don't want to defend her too much because it was still f*****g horrible. But these kids spend most of their time in a virtual reality. Not just kids. We're all posting messages in an online society where there is little responsibility and we can say what we like without consequence. Young people who have grown up in this environment may find it difficult to separate the two realities.

Are we going towards a world where any form of online bullying that results in suicide could become involuntary manslaughter?

I think she should spend some time in juvenile detention but I don't agree with the conviction of 'manslaughter'.

This reminds me of a famous case a good few years back, where a guy was streaming himself taking drugs. The people in the chat were goading him to take more and more until said user eventually had multiple overdoses and died.

Samaris

Minderbinder wrote: »

The frontal lobe isn't fully developed until the late 20's though and 17 is a kid. I don't want to defend her too much because it was still f*****g horrible. But these kids spend most of their time in a virtual reality. Not just kids. We're all posting messages in an online society where there is little responsibility and we can say what we like without consequence. Young people who have grown up in this environment may find it difficult to separate the two realities.

Are we going towards a world where any form of online bullying that results in suicide could become involuntary manslaughter?

I think she should spend some time in juvenile detention but I don't agree with the conviction of 'manslaughter'.

I understand you're not really trying to defend her words/actions, but seventeen is old enough to have consequences and to be able to understand the consequences. A 25-year old could argue that their frontal lobe isn't developed enough (or rather, it could be argued on their behalf), but we accept that 25 is well and truly old enough to know better. Seventeen is not legally an adult, but it is old enough to understand something like this. There's no real cut-and-dry adulthood, and I agree that this sort of empathy is gradually developed, but if it's not well on the way by 17, there's a serious issue developing.

What is "any form of online bullying" in this situation? A situation where one person (or a group) hounds someone to commit suicide, seeing they are vulnerable? Yes, I think that should have punishment. Where a girlfriend or boyfriend encourages their partner to kill themselves, talking about how their families would get over it and convincing them that the best way out is to kill themselves?

I'd be more iffy on a suicide pact where one member pulls out though, unless it's clear they never intended to go through with it. I also keep reservations on someone who is terminally and agonisingly ill being supported in their rational choice.

But this was neither of those cases. This was a young woman who was old enough to understand what she was doing encouraging a young man she should have been in a position to help to kill himself, wronging him when he needed her and bringing pain to everyone involved.

seenitall

[quote="Minderbinder;103830637

Are we going towards a world where any form of online bullying that results in suicide could become involuntary manslaughter?'.[/quote]

No, just the ones where there is evidence of a determination to goad, guilt-trip and emotionally manipulate another into taking their own life.

Those texts are utterly chilling. It is evident from reading them that she had a fierce determination to have a hand in bringing about his death by any means available; some are sweet and comforting, assuring him this was the right thing to do and that she would look after his family and any other fallout, some are gently encouraging, some are stroppy and bullying. But all of them have just the one intention behind them. They are the handiwork of a sadistic, inhumane, cruel piece of scum.

The fact that she would most likely walk free from this in any EU country is an indictment of the EU "justice" systems, afaic.

Oh, and a 17 year old knows exactly what death means. Sheesh.

Arcade_Tryer

Deleted User wrote: »

Nonsense verdict.

This. And thankfully will most likely be overturned on appeal due to 1st amendment rights.

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I think she thought she was cleverer than she actually was to be honest. Teenage girls can be very silly in situations like this even tough people say that girls are more mature in my experience they often aren't.

Apart from the charges being nonsense, the above post gives some insight into the misogynistic aspect of public reaction to this case too. A lot of people more outraged by the fact that it was a teenage girl who committed this morally objectionable behaviour as opposed to a man or an adult.

wakka12 wrote: »

hope she rots in hell, Id have more respect for a murderer than her

And then there is this. The above poster could potentially be called for jury duty some day. Think about that.

Arcade_Tryer

seenitall wrote: »

The fact that she would most likely walk free from this in any EU country is an indictment of the EU "justice" systems, afaic.
.

Before the trial, the US is the country a person would most likely walk free from this type of charge due to the first amendment. For this reason, the verdict will probably be overturned on appeal.