• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Sign in to follow this  
Shortforbob

Michelle Carter?

Recommended Posts

Something is making me very uneasy about this conviction.

Not quite sure what.

Should an anon cyber bully that drives someone to suicide be convicted of a crime? Absolutely IMHO.

Does the fact of this pair being in a relationship of sorts, make her encouragement worse than a total stranger finding a vulnerable person and urging them to suicide?

Deep and sticky one.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/in-landmark-case-michelle-carter-convicted-for-urging-her-boyfriend-to-commit-suicide-20170616-gwt103.html

No matter that she was an hour away at the time, Michelle Carter has been found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for urging her 18-year boyfriend to kill himself.

So ruled US juvenile court Judge Lawrence Moniz in Bristol County, Massachusetts, in a landmark criminal case that could have a wider impact on how courts view suicide and protected speech in the future. 

The novel case rested on more than 1000 Facebook and text messages exchanged between two troubled teenagers over two years.

Conrad Roy was found dead in the cab of his pickup truck in the parking lot of a Kmart on July 13, 2014, with a tube from a generator pumping in carbon monoxide.

 

And don't jump on my neck, I don't know what to make of this...Being a believer in people being responsible for their actions..the verdict is correct IMHO..but what can of worms will this open up?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the ACLU on this one.
 

Quote

 

This conviction exceeds the limits of our criminal laws and violates free speech protections guaranteed by the Massachusetts and U.S. Constitutions.

The implications of this conviction go far beyond the tragic circumstances of Mr. Roy’s death. If allowed to stand, Ms. Carter’s conviction could chill important and worthwhile end-of-life discussions between loved ones across the Commonwealth.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Free speech" arguments about this are angels on the head of a pin legalistic bullshit - she encouraged and berated a deeply disturbed person to kill himself - which he did. She shouted "Fire" in a crowded theater.

Guilty as charged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"There is no law in Massachusetts making it a crime to encourage someone, or even to persuade someone, to commit suicide. "

That assertion seems a bit odd to me, particularly the second point. They've reported some of the 2000+ texts she made where she admitted to knowing what she was doing, knew he was emotionally distraught and vulnerable, was actively afraid of the consequences of what she did, tried to cover it up, planned to profit from the event by becoming an 'anti-suicide' advocate, etc.

I don't see how this is a 'free speech' issue.   I'll wait till the ACLU puts out an actual brief describing their position 'cause I don't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this