• You must be logged in to see or use the Shoutbox. Besides, if you haven't registered, you really should. It's quick and it will make your life a little better. Trust me. So just register and make yourself at home with like-minded individuals who share either your morbid curiousity or sense of gallows humor.
It reminds me of the recent case of the male nurse who encouraged several people to commit suicide online.
I was under the impression, based on that case, that encouraging suicide was protected by the First Amendment:

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/03/19/encouraging-suicide-isnt-a-crime-minnesota-court-says/

The difference in this case is that Michelle Carter knew the victim in real life, where the nurse was an anonymous internet contact. Also that the nurse was older and creepy-looking. It's almost more disturbing when the encourager looks like a normal teen girl. Still, I'm not sure that a manslaughter charge is appropriate.
 
I don't see how she can be convicted, unless the state has a law explicitly criminalizing encouraging someone to commit suicide (CA does, it's well over a century old and rarely used).
 
I'm pretty sure only certain states are for assisted suicide. This is not assisted, this is encouraged. Unless they get her for something other than rooting him to get back in the car, I don't think it will go much further than this. She will have this hang over her the rest of her life, as she should, imo.

What kind of moron thinks that written (or texted) conversations wouldn't be apparent after he died when he had his phone on him? Seriously, she's fucking retarded.
 
Last edited:
Precisely. Assisted suicide is to physically assist with a suicide. This would not fall under assisted suicide statutes.

Your laws differ from state to state, so what charges might or might not be capable of being brought to bear in such a case probably varies from place to place.

I am pretty sure that on this side of the pond - with the text message evidence they have - they'd be able to make a manslaughter charge stick and a British jury would convict. But then some dumb ass judge would give her a pitiful sentence anyway.
 
I was reading this one on the FP I think.

It's bugging me too. I think it's the girl's forty-forehead and her complete and utter lack of empathy covered by a mask of sweetness. She sent THOUSANDS of messages to him, they used to date and she was in constant contact with his family she had to know somewhere inside that those messages would come out. Yet she kept up the act with his family knowing they'd be doubly devastated when they found out.

That shit cannot be fixed. I know she's still a teen, and they're mentally imbalanced by nature, but this goes well beyond your normal teen assholery. This shit is evil.
I do think she is guilty of asserting undue negative influence on someone that was having some issues and is a sociopath. He thought she was his friend confidant and life rope. She is scum and her parents are trying to defend her epic fail for raising something like that then trying to rationalize their crimes and complete lack of morals and ethics. Maybe if they hadn't of for this long she wouldn't have been such a piece of shit. It reminds me of that later remake of that old movie even though the two half siblings weren't involved in suicide so much as morally corrupting and ruining lives: cruel intentions
 
Your laws differ from state to state, so what charges might or might not be capable of being brought to bear in such a case probably varies from place to place.

It does vary. As I mentioned, California has a law that specifically criminalizes encouragement. This is uncommon. Most state law considers "causes or aids" to be in the physical sense. Convictions for encouraging suicide are not common. Mass is a common law state, which means I don't really know how this will play out. But generally speaking, it is only illegal to physically assist with a suicide.

I am pretty sure that on this side of the pond - with the text message evidence they have - they'd be able to make a manslaughter charge stick and a British jury would convict. But then some dumb ass judge would give her a pitiful sentence anyway.

I'll stick with this side of the pond, myself. While her behavior is reprehensible, I think we set a dangerous precedent making it illegal.
 
I'll stick with this side of the pond, myself. While her behavior is reprehensible, I think we set a dangerous precedent making it illegal.

I find this a bit confusing:

  1. A person commits an offence under section 2 of the Suicide Act 1961 if he or she does an act capable of encouraging or assisting the suicide or attempted suicide of another person, and that act was intended to encourage or assist suicide or an attempt at suicide. This offence is referred to in this policy as "encouraging or assisting suicide". The consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is required before an individual may be prosecuted.
  2. The offence of encouraging or assisting suicide carries a maximum penalty of 14 years' imprisonment. This reflects the seriousness of the offence.

  1. The case of Purdy did not change the law: only Parliament can change the law on encouraging or assisting suicide. [this one is actually 5.]
  2. This policy does not in any way "decriminalise" the offence of encouraging or assisting suicide. Nothing in this policy can be taken to amount to an assurance that a person will be immune from prosecution if he or she does an act that encourages or assists the suicide or the attempted suicide of another person. [this one is actually 6.]

http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/assisted_suicide_policy.html

Methinks I shall be reading more about this when I have a moment....
 
Well, it comes down to those two words - "assisting" and "encouraging" - and what they mean in legal terms.

But in terms of the English language as most of us understand it, whilst the girl was not in any way physically "assisting", she most definitely was "encouraging" in a big way.
 
Morally f*cked up- definitely.. Legally- slippery slope in legal justice.. One way ticket to Hell paid for in blood!! Evil b*tch!! With close friends like that, who the f*ck needs enemies for god's sake!! :shrug:
 
This could potentially be a legal quagmire.

In those states where "assisting" suicide is illegal, but "encouraging" it is not -and if they can't get her on a manslaughter rap -prosecuting her at all might well depend upon how exactly "assisting" is defined.

Certainly, she gave no actual physical assistance. But advising and encouraging and talking someone through their fears sufficiently to be able to allow them to overcome their qualms about harming themselves, and lending them moral support for their suicide attempt in a way that helps them to go through with it, could itself potentially be construed as "assisting". A prosecution might argue exactly that. A defence will insist that "assisting" be more narrowly defined as physically assisting only.

Only a court could ultimately decide - if both prosecution and defence take these positions and believe in them and seek to win their case on such arguments.

On a personal level I think she deserves to be prosecuted. I hate the idea that such evil and twisted bitches can justwalk free. But I understand the potential for "slippery slopes" too. It's not an easy one at all.
 
If she can be prosecuted for this, a huge can of worms in regards to the first amendment is going to be cracked open.

Think about all the musicians and artists that graphically depict and/or support suicide/homicide.
She did something absolutely abhorrent in my opinion, but I don't think the law should cover this one. If tried successfully, her case would set a precedent that could shake our very ability to have free speech to the core.
 
  1. A person commits an offence under section 2 of the Suicide Act 1961 if he or she does an act capable of encouraging or assisting the suicide or attempted suicide of another person, and that act was intended to encourage or assist suicide or an attempt at suicide. This offence is referred to in this policy as "encouraging or assisting suicide". The consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is required before an individual may be prosecuted.
  2. The offence of encouraging or assisting suicide carries a maximum penalty of 14 years' imprisonment. This reflects the seriousness of the offence.
  1. The case of Purdy did not change the law: only Parliament can change the law on encouraging or assisting suicide. [this one is actually 5.]
  2. This policy does not in any way "decriminalise" the offence of encouraging or assisting suicide. Nothing in this policy can be taken to amount to an assurance that a person will be immune from prosecution if he or she does an act that encourages or assists the suicide or the attempted suicide of another person. [this one is actually 6.]
Torn here, too, but only in that for some reason, I can't see this being a good thing here in the U.S. as a legal practicum/standard of prosecution. We manipulate the ever-livin' f**k out of everything here and this could so easily become a Pandora's Box for criminalizing just about ANY convo we had with ANYone about their suicidal ideations. Of course, the U.S. isn't the only country who does it, by far, but we're the champs when it comes to clever ways to twist and contort laws when motivated.

But oddly, in the case of this little psycho, I reeeeeeally like the wording in this U.K. prosecution statute because the way I read it (not saying I understand exactly how it's applied in the courts), it *IS* inclusive of her actions and TBH, the first thought that popped in my mind when I originally started reading this story was, "Damn, I wish they could at least pop her for Involuntary Manslaughter" (invol. b/c she had no real way of knowing for sure if he would *truly* end himself via her encouragement/interest which I am certain she was probably hoping for with giddy, dizzying delight). I also like @TheMorningStar 's comment re: "Deliberate Indifference," though I doubt she could be convicted on it. At the end of the day, the courts generally say people have the right to kill themselves as long as they die. You can still be charged for it in many states if you live.

I also see how this could seem like Munchausen's by-proxy on an emotional level, but IMO, she's classic for a Borderline Personality Disorder for the same things everyone's already mentioned from being a do-gooding, "Suicide Prevention" glory hound to using her suicidal friend as her pet project to garner even more attention (used to teach a S.P. course for new cops, so I agree this is a cardinal sign of sociopathy, if not psychopathy). No matter which way he decided to go, she could definitely manipulate the circumstances into a win-win public ploy to gain support, sympathy and self-agrandizing popularity.

Who the hell knows what all she actually talked to him face to face about before the contradictory psycho texting came up? Borderlines are notorious for being so narcissistic they think no one will ever figure them out and therein lies their biggest mistakes. They can rarely even keep track of their own lies, let alone factor out the variables of how to properly cover their tracks. These contradictions are classic.

Though no one was very impressed with what @JackBurton had to say, and I get that, I was actually in a situation as a kid where someone I was very close to whom I considered a best friend, had a mother with insulin-dependent diabetes and high blood pressure. Knowing what little I did about both conditions, mostly from my friend, I'd hit a suicidal ideation patch and asked her to swipe a bottle of insulin, some some syringes and a few blood pressure pills from her mom so I could just get high, overdose on insulin to take out my blood sugar and take my blood pressure down so low it would stop my heart.

I had told her the whole time why I wanted to just leave the planet (depression, self-loathing, misanthropy and hopelessness) and she kept saying she understood. Several days later, she came into my room after she got back from pass (group home) and handed me a brown paper lunch bag with my "suicide kit" in it. She gave me a hug, told me she "loved" me, then told me goodbye as she shut the door and left so she could come back and "find me" later (and clean up the evidence, of course). The fact she actually brought me what I'd asked for snapped me into reality. So, I liked his post b/c I know for a fact it *can* happen. I was able to convince her my life here was over, and that living with the emotional pain and despair I was feeling was worse than death could ever be. And, she said, O.K.

Did this nutbucket do that? I doubt it, but it *is* possible. Do I think it falls under "Assisted Suicide." Under U.S. law, not for a minute. That was NOT what this hard-fought, hard-won law was designed for. If that's the case, we'd have moody, temporarily depressed teenagers, even young children in some cases, grown ups, etc., who've broken up with their gfs/bfs, gotten in trouble with their parents, those in divorce and custody situations, etc., "helping" each other commit suicide all over the place.

As I said, I don't like what I personally see U.S. defense attorneys doing with it anymore than what crooked, win-at-all-costs, politically-motivated prosecutors *could* (and likely would, IMO) do with it. But, I do understand both sides of the argument. My knee-jerk reaction was some sort of legal responsibility until I heard some prosecutor in my head taking a convo out of context in court saying, "And, Miss So and So. Did you, in fact, tell Mr. So and So (suicidal) that 'suicide' would 'be a solution to his problems'? Please answer yes, or no." Defendant: "Yes, but I didn't mean..." Prosecutor: "Thank you, Miss So and So. No further questions, your Honor." JMO.
 
Last edited:
In response to your points, @gatekeeper, I totally understand the point you are making in regard to @JackBurton 's comments. When you put it like that, perhaps he does have a point, though his style of delivery isn't the best way of winning us over to it. But like you, I doubt that this bitch's intentions were in any way so altruistic.

I respect your knowledge and education in the field of human psychology - I have always had an interest in the subject but certainly have no Phds in it or anything. So you are probably right when you say she looks to you like a Borderline Personality Disorder case. Do you think Munchausens is unlikely to be the main problem here? And since you are interested in psychology, have you ever heard of Beverly Allitt? British nurse serial killer who murdered numerous newborn babies simply because she enjoyed all the drama and attention that ensued. She was diagnosed with Munchausens by Proxy. An interesting case study.

And yes, in the UK, encouraging suicide is illegal too, so she'd definitely find her ass in jail here - unless she ended up in a psychiatric institute instead. And that raises an interesting observation in regards to "slippery slopes". There have not as yet been any cases that I know of here of that law being twisted to prosecute people it was not designed for. For one thing, the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) assesses each case being put forward for trial, and if the assessment is that the chances of conviction are less than 50%, no prosecution takes place. This is an added safeguard built into our system after a spate of wrongful convictions were overturned in the 80s and 90s. The police themselves know in advance about this of course, so rarely attempt to bring prosecutions unless they too feel sure there is a good chance of conviction. Like cops everywhere, they are unenthusiastic about wasting their time.

Perhaps that is why the "slippery slope" fears have as yet not been borne out here.
 
Last edited:
I respect your knowledge and education in the field of human psychology - I have always had an interest in the subject but certainly have no Phds in it or anything. So you are probably right when you say she looks to you like a Borderline Personality Disorder case.

No more right or wrong than any of us internet media diagnosticians, HTH :joyful:. Just chucking my $.02 into the nut bucket. I am noooo Dr. Phil to be sure (I've got better hair. Or just more of it. And zero doctorates in anything :shifty:. Yet. Gotta smack the 'rents with something before I croak :smuggrin:). Other than nursing diagnoses, I'm about as qualified to diagnose somebody on or offline as the housekeeping staff, but I know you're just being complimentary. I've just had the opportunity to work with a lot different diagnoses in addition to some basic Ed., and like you (like a lot of us, really), the way their minds work fascinates me. I can keep myself entertained for hours just imagining the biopsychophysiology and environmental factors behind these hinky thinkers.

Do you think Munchausens is unlikely to be the main problem here? And since you are interested in psychology, have you ever heard of Beverly Allitt? British nurse serial killer who murdered numerous newborn babies simply because she enjoyed all the drama and attention that ensued. She was diagnosed with Munchausens by Proxy. An interesting case study.

Brilliant example! Yes, I just watched my umpteenth rerun of her case on ID's "Deadly Women" a couple of weeks ago, and man, she gets my blood boiling, but quick. I'm not a violent person by nature, but the older I get, the more I wonder what I'd really do if someone like her was within arm's reach, smh. Munchausen's b.p. could certainly be involved with this case, IMPO, as borderlines are prone to it anyway, but the real tell will come if/when they find out if in her work as an "advocate" for suicide prevention, she's ever been involved in anything else like this with anyone else who completed their suicide attempt(s) or not. On one hand, she's awfully young to have collected too many forlorn, hopeless souls yet, but on the other, she's right in the middle of hog heaven when it comes to high-risk candidates for suicidal ideation to bolster her attention-seeking ploys. Ugh. I've got to get that sick :cow: Beverly Allitt out of my head. :yuck:

And yes, in the UK, encouraging suicide is illegal too, so she'd definitely find her ass in jail here - unless she ended up in a psychiatric institute instead. And that raises an interesting observation in regards to "slippery slopes". There have not as yet been any cases that I know of here of that law being twisted to prosecute people it was not designed for. For one thing, the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) assesses each case being put forward for trial, and if the assessment is that the chances of conviction are less than 50%, no prosecution takes place. This is an added safeguard built into our system after a spate of wrongful convictions were overturned in the 80s and 90s. The police themselves know in advance about this of course, so rarely attempt to bring prosecutions unless they too feel sure there is a good chance of conviction. Like cops everywhere, they are unenthusiastic about wasting their time. Perhaps that is why the "slippery slope" fears have as yet not been borne out here.

That's excellent, comparative information to have. I don't know how often these kinds of cases would have to happen here in the U.S. to get the amount of attention it would take for legislators to take those who encourage the suicide of another seriously, but I think it at least bears investigation and statistical analysis. I'll bet the Psych community is full of independent information on people like this little bitch who've encouraged others to take themselves out, esp. in the teenaged and early 20-something population, and that these stats have never been collectively collated let alone studied with any serious interest.

Here in the U.S., it seems to require that the parent(s) of a victim draft a bill named after their dead kid and lobby it around for a couple of years before state legislatures pay attention to anything. I know the U.K. often takes a lot of hits from Americans when it comes to certain criminal matters, but I really like the way your laws on this subject are designed. I still get a very uneasy feeling about it working here in the U.S., and truthfully, if it came up for a vote here in my state, I couldn't, in good conscience, help vote it in after working as a nurse in our state CJ system, but applied correctly, I think you guys have a great model of what that law should look like.
 
Last edited:
Well, alot has been said here, so there's little for me to add. Simply, I think she's a bitch and a cunt - yes, BOTH at the same time - and deserves some type of consequence that will hopefully deter her from doing something like this again. Good lord...what sort of mother might she be? Will she raise children simply to do heinous things at her command?
 
What a load of shit. She didn't kill anybody. The dude was suicidal, he wanted to die. She helped. Big fucking deal.
@JackBurton the defense said they weren't showing a fair scope of the text.. also apparently this kid had suffered from depression for quite sometime.. this was not his FIRST attempt at suicide.. she was torn seeing him this way.. and he accepted his fate by texting I love you to her. I DON'T agree with her 'egging' it on.. there were TONS of other options.. however she was NOT present and he had the FINAL DECISION. This is morally f*cked indeed.
 
......but applied correctly, I think you guys have a great model of what that law should look like.

Yeah.....up until the point where a judge decides on a sentence....and lets us all down. Over here, offenders often recieve pitiful sentences from judges for serious crimes, yet they come down like a ton of bricks on a variety of petty offenders.

Ours is a nation where you can get substantially more time for selling pot, than for possessing child porn.

Send us a few of your meanest judges, and we'll really kick the asses of all the evil scum, lol.
 
Last edited:
a huge can of worms in regards to the first amendment is going to be cracked open.
Not necessarily. There have always been exceptions to the coverage provided to a person by the 1st Amendment, i.e.: you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater to produce panic and mayhem, this could fall into a category that isn't covered by the 1st Amendment.

I don't know for sure one way or the other, I'm just pointing out that there are exceptions to the protection of the 1st Amendment.
 
Honor student who 'texted her friend telling him to get back in his truck and gas himself to death' argues encouraging someone else to commit suicide is NOT a crime

'There’s no law in Massachusetts that says you can’t encourage someone else to commit suicide, like there is in some other states,' attorney Joseph Cataldo told New Bedford Juvenile Court.
Cataldo filed the motion on Monday on the basis that the grand jury that indicted Carter in February for involuntary manslaughter had done so on 'insufficient evidence', the Boston Herald reports.
He told the court that the indictment is 'unconstitutionally void for vagueness under the due process provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ues-encouraging-commit-suicide-NOT-crime.html
 
Just because your lawyer thinks that it's not against the law to urge your suicidal friend to commit suicide does not mean that you need to do it even to get the loophole closed. It makes you a horrible human being for even thinking about it.
 
'There’s no law in Massachusetts that says you can’t encourage someone else to commit suicide, like there is in some other states,' attorney Joseph Cataldo told New Bedford Juvenile Court.

The lawgivers of that state clearly never imagined anybody would be that morally bankrupt. :shifty:
 
What a sick and twisted game she played...and I do believe it was a game to her...a power trip...intentionally deflecting others from helping him..as she controlled his demise.
 
What's this legal loophole verbiage? What nonsense. It's either a crime or it isn't, and it appears there's no law on the books that makes this a crime. End of fucking story.
 
Back
Top