Guilty Verdict in Teen 'Suicide-by-Text' Case

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Admittedly I do not know the ins and outs of your laws. Nonetheless, I was repeating the very words of American journalists citing American lawyers. I'm sure as a layman the laws will confuse you. it's why we have lawyers, after all.

There is a vast difference between the law you posted, and these laws:

Colorado Revised Statutes Title 18 Criminal Code § 18-3-104 

(1) A person commits the crime of manslaughter if:
(a) Such person recklessly causes the death of another person;  or
(b) Such person intentionally causes or aids another person to commit suicide.

Colorado

Delaware Code Ann. Tit. 11, § 645 – A person is guilty of promoting suicide when the person intentionally causes or aids another person to attempt suicide, or when the person intentionally aids another person to commit suicide;

Delaware

North Dakota Cent. Code § 12.1-16-04 – Any person who intentionally or knowingly aids, abets, facilitates, solicits, or incites another person to commit suicide, or who provides to, delivers to, procures for, or prescribes for another person any drug or instrument with knowledge that the other person intends to attempt to commit suicide with the drug or instrument is guilty of a Class C felony.

North Dakota

Nebraska Rev. Stat. Ann. § 28-307 – (1) A person commits assisting suicide when, with intent to assist another person in committing suicide, he aids and abets him in committing or attempting to commit suicide.;

Nebraska

Does Mass. not have a comparable law, outlining the crime and charge? This is what I and the defence have been talking about.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Those laws are irrelevant, the laws of the various states are independent unless overridden by the Constitution, which assisted suicide is not. I gave you the relevant Massachusetts law which makes any type of assisted suicide illegal. The Massachusetts Patient's Rights advocacy also recognizes this as evidenced by their quotes. 'Assisting someone in suicide is a common law violation' in Massachusetts.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

In other words there is no comparable law. That's not irrelevant given that is what I and the lawyers I quoted were talking about this whole time, against your irrelevant protests.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Shamrock6

I think the problem may be that you're not using big enough words, and not using them often enough.

Try that, maybe? Everybody will be suitably impressed, I'm sure.

I'd be fine enough with just the knowledge of simple punctuation.

Here's a big word for you. Have you ever heard of a dingleberry? Suitable for hanging on but not much else?

Perhaps you should try wiping better. Might take away some of that overwhelming familiarity you have with them.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
In other words there is no comparable law.

You have the statute*, son, try reading it, that is the law in Massachusetts.



*which you asked for

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

And fact..she was found guilty, I'm not sure why he keeps citing the defence's arguments? their argument was rejected..they lost.

a reply to: vonclod

Oh, now you did it! Making crazy comments like that.

a reply to: vonclod

Because, as was said earlier, it's easy for a layman to get confused with the laws. That's apparently what has happened here: a layman has been confused by the law and rather than accept that the arguments presented failed, layman elects to cling to them in the belief that their layman's interpretation is more accurate than the court's.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I find your analysis to be accurate you dingleberry. The law and the outcome are pretty cut and dry.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Indeed, the law and it's interpretation can be very confusing..and some people just like to argue.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Perhaps you should try wiping better. Might take away some of that overwhelming familiarity you have with them.

Still clinging I see. Wouldn't want to stop you.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

He did attend The Dingleberry School of Law

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You have the statute*, son, try reading it, that is the law in Massachusetts.

*which you asked for

I did read it. It mentions no crime unlike the other states, just like the lawyers said. The fact that she got charged with something else entirely, with no reference to your statute, should be revealing enough.

a reply to: vonclod

Indeed, the law and it's interpretation can be very confusing..and some people just like to argue.

Or not. Some just like to say "that's irrelevant" when it isn't.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I did read it. It mentions no crime unlike the other states, just like the lawyers said.

Once again, trying to help you, how a law in one state is written has nothing to do with how a law in another state is written unless they are superseded by the Constitution*.

The fact that she got charged with something else entirely, with no reference to your statute, should be revealing enough.

That is also irrelevant. What someone is charged with is up to the District Attorney, who, in my opinion, decided to overcharge the person in this case. But that is a different argument altogether.




* The 'Constitution' is the law thingy we use to do the law stuff

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

So is Sharon Beckman, law professor at Boston College lying, or are you lying?

Unlike 40 other states, Massachusetts has no law against assisted suicide, and the prosecution appeared to go beyond the scope of the existing law, said Sharon Beckman, a law professor at Boston College.

“Before this case, the law says that a person is responsible for their own suicide,” Beckman said. “That is the default common law and applies no matter what the other person said or whether they handed them the weapon.”

Is the legal director of the Massachusetts ACLU lying, or are you lying?

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

Is Janet E. Johnson, a prominent defense lawyer based in Florida, lying, or is it you who is lying?

Massachusetts has no law banning assisted suicide, and Johnson said it appears prosecutors are trying Carter for that offense, based on her texts.

The law is so cut and dry after all.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I didn't say anything to you, and I certainly didn't force you to say anything to me. If anybody is desperately "clinging" to anybody, it's you big guy. You don't get to engage somebody, then when they engage back, claim that they're "clinging" to anything. Nobody likes that guy that tries to provoke a fight and then whines when he gets his ass handed to him.

Fortunately, I know how to wipe properly so your attempt at hanging on isn't quite working out. But I'm happy for you that you're getting the attention you so desperately, and obviously, crave.

Go ahead and get that next comment in, try and spin it as me "clinging" some more. I know how much you need to get the last word in.

#wipelikeabigboy

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

He did attend The Dingleberry School of Law

Graduated Summa Cum Poo, obviously.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
So is Sharon Beckman, law professor at Boston College lying, or are you lying?

I'm a Mason, I'm always lying.

And so was the statute I gave you.

a reply to: Shamrock6

You didn't use big enough words, nor often enough. I'm not impressed in the slightest. I'll hand your ass back to you if you ask nicely.