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

a reply to: SprocketUK

I am not defending the women, only logic and the law.

The purpose of jails is a subject of great debate, and really not part of the discussion. But she poses no threat to me and mine. If you feel threatened and controlled by texts please dispose of your phones. For your safety off course.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: silo13

No more than texting on the phone?

FAR more than 'texting' on the phone.

False. The objective fact is she was texting on a phone, and she is charged for manslaughter is if she poisoned the man with carbon monoxide herself.

So if I txt a hitman to kill someone I should be fine?

originally posted by: Notably0ffbeat
a reply to: SprocketUK

I am not defending the women, only logic and the law.

The purpose of jails is a subject of great debate, and really not part of the discussion. But she poses no threat to me and mine. If you feel threatened and controlled by texts please dispose of your phones. For your safety off course.

you can't really have a debate about the judicial system while isolating one of the major arms og that system.

I don't see what she did as too different from an adult using text and messaging apps to groom a minor for sexual exploitation.
Surely you aren't the sort of person who wants all those paedos free on our streets?

Please confirm you aren't the sort of sicko that thinks it's ok to groom young kids in this way....

this girl is dangerous in my eyes, my teenage son was dating a girl who was not to dissimilar to this girl except she was trying to create a suicide pact that they would both do it. I found the emails and asked her politely to stop with this as it was toxic and I would be informing her school to tell her parents.

turns out this girl had had a suicide pact with the previous boyfriend before my son and when he dumped her she tried pushing him off the bridge of our local park above a river rather high up.

scary business young males can be influenced so easily my son didn't and never has had suicidal thoughts but he went along with it saying he would save her but towards the end of it all he was been rather agreeing .looking back its a good job I am an over protective mama and checked his emails as I do genuinely worry what could of happened if allowed to go any further.

the school informed the girls parents and she is getting the help she needs but kids at the age of 13 acting like that is scary!

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: silo13

No more than texting on the phone?

FAR more than 'texting' on the phone.

False. The objective fact is she was texting on a phone, and she is charged for manslaughter is if she poisoned the man with carbon monoxide herself.

So if I txt a hitman to kill someone I should be fine?

No. You paying someone to kill another is far different.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: silo13

No more than texting on the phone?

FAR more than 'texting' on the phone.

False. The objective fact is she was texting on a phone, and she is charged for manslaughter is if she poisoned the man with carbon monoxide herself.

So if I txt a hitman to kill someone I should be fine?

No. You paying someone to kill another is far different.

It's just a text though. So explain how it's different. Both texts are designed to kill a person and get someone else to do the killing.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: silo13

No more than texting on the phone?

FAR more than 'texting' on the phone.

False. The objective fact is she was texting on a phone, and she is charged for manslaughter is if she poisoned the man with carbon monoxide herself.

So if I txt a hitman to kill someone I should be fine?

No. You paying someone to kill another is far different.

It's just a text though. So explain how it's different. Both texts are designed to kill a person and get someone else to do the killing.

One is suicide, one is homicide. That's how they are different.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

They both result in a death that otherwise would have been averted, so what is the actual difference. Are they any less dead?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

They both result in a death that otherwise would have been averted, so what is the actual difference. Are they any less dead?

I don't feel I need to explain the actual difference between suicide and homicide.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Except that's logical fallacy as that would be comparing the hitman to the kid who killed himself. The only difference is in who did the killing, can't put a dead person in jail. You CAN however jail someone who assisted the suicide, which she did.

So to be clear you are backtracking on your original comment that texting is not illegal so she did nothing wrong, because you now admit texting CAN be illegal depending on context?

Takes a big man to admit mistakes.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Except that's logical fallacy as that would be comparing the hitman to the kid who killed himself. The only difference is in who did the killing, can't put a dead person in jail. You CAN however jail someone who assisted the suicide, which she did.

So to be clear you are backtracking on your original comment that texting is not illegal so she did nothing wrong, because you now admit texting CAN be illegal depending on context?

Takes a big man to admit mistakes.

No, you're comparing homocide to suicide in a fit of casuistry. One involves the killing of another, the other involves the killing of oneself.

Texting is not illegal, but paying for someone to murder another is. It is you who is pretending texting is illegal.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

And texting is not illegal, but assisting and pushing someone to commit suicide is. Assisted suicide is a crime. See how easy this is? You really should have just stopped when you were unable to get off the starting line.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

And texting is not illegal, but assisting and pushing someone to commit suicide is. Assisted suicide is a crime. See how easy this is? You really should have just stopped when you were unable to get off the starting line.

If this is analogous to a race, you started in the wrong direction, went in circles, ending up at a finish line of your own imagination.

"Assisting suicide" is not illegal in Mass, never mind that pesky First Ammendment. She was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. Manslaughter is homicide. The kid committed suicide. Try to square that circle.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

False, I hit the finish line in one post and you still haven't started going in the right direction.

Assisted suicide is illegal in MA. Last I heard they had it on the ballot about 5 years ago and it failed. What she did is homicide, she assisted him in his suicide, even worse, she urged him to do it.

She text someone asking them to end a life, and when they tried to back out she convinced them to do it, and they did.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

False, I hit the finish line in one post and you still haven't started going in the right direction.

Assisted suicide is illegal in MA. Last I heard they had it on the ballot about 5 years ago and it failed. What she did is homicide, she assisted him in his suicide, even worse, she urged him to do it.

She text someone asking them to end a life, and when they tried to back out she convinced them to do it, and they did.

It's not homocide. It was suicide, evidenced by the fact that he killed himself. Her lawyer even reminded the judge that Mass. does not criminalize assisted suicide.

The New York Times writes

Ms. Carter’s lawyers, and other civil liberties advocates, have noted in legal filings that Massachusetts, unlike many other states, has no law against encouraging someone to commit suicide and have said prosecutors are stretching the definition of involuntary manslaughter.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The guilty verdict says you are wrong. All of which has nothing to do with your point that it's a text so it can't be illegal, where I pointed out exactly how a text can be illegal and you agreed, then went back to saying a text can't be illegal. I feel bad for you, I see no point on continuing.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
"Assisting suicide" is not illegal in Mass...

Assisting someone who commits suicide is most certainly illegal in Massachusetts. But this is not what she was charged with.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
She text someone asking them to end a life, and when they tried to back out she convinced them to do it, and they did.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't she also on the phone with him at the last moment where he was getting cold feet and she urged him to get back in his car and kill himself?

ETA: Yeah, she was...

"I was talking on the phone with him when he killed himself ... I heard him die," Carter texted to Olivia Mosolgo days after Roy's death, Mosolgo testified.  Source

Will they be going after the owner of 4chan next? People who created "how to kill yourself" videos? People who wrote instructions online?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
"Assisting suicide" is not illegal in Mass...

Assisting someone who commits suicide is most certainly illegal in Massachusetts. But this is not what she was charged with.

I think you're confusing euthanasia with encouraging someone to commit suicide. According to the defence, there is no crime in encouraging suicide.