What do you guys think of this? Encouraging someone to kill themselves, a crime?

[Aashenfox]

Have a read...

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40181522

 

I have to say, if I was the judge, I think I'd want to throw the book at her, I'd put her away for aggravated manslaughter (is that a thing?). She's asked to be judged by a judge, rather than a jury, interesting choice.

 

It;s so patently clear that she did it for the attention as the grieving girlfriend, but on the other side, he had indeed been planning it for a long time. Would he have done it anyway? I think she had a responsibility to talk him OUT of it if she was a responsible person who really cared about him, and the bottom line is if not for her influence, he would be alive today. What do you guys think?

[Strudul]

Reminds me of 13 Reasons...

[coldel]

Interestingly assisted suicide is legal in the US (well a quick google turns that up!) but yes clearly there was ulterior motive here, she should have reported it to the police.

[Ekona]

Reminds me of 13 Reasons...

Reminds me of an episode of Law & Order. If it's not already, I can promise we'll see a made-for-TV film of this.

 

Vile woman. But involuntary manslaughter? Gonna be a tough one to prove if my understanding of US law in general is correct. Definitely right to let the judge rule rather than a jury though, she'd have def lost that.

[Strudul]

Is there a difference between mentally bullying someone until they kill themselves and persuading them to do so?

[Aashenfox]

Is there a difference between mentally bullying someone until they kill themselves and persuading them to do so?

 

Yes. I'm not sure how to express it though, it might come to me later.

[Willsy1980]

This could technically be a proxy murder, typically they are 'Hitman' killings. Though in this case she used the victim to perform the hit on himself.

She should get life (didn't read the whole article so no idea of the sentence) she forced her will of his death on him to be honest.

[Strudul]

Is there a difference between mentally bullying someone until they kill themselves and persuading them to do so?

Yes. I'm not sure how to express it though, it might come to me later.

One is intent to harm, with the killing being an accidental byproduct, the other is simple intent to kill.

 

Same effect, different intent.

 

Which is the difference between manslaughter and murder I believe.

[Aashenfox]

This could technically be a proxy murder, typically they are 'Hitman' killings. Though in this case she used the victim to perform the hit on himself.

She should get life (didn't read the whole article so no idea of the sentence) she forced her will of his death on him to be honest.

 

If she knew that he had suicidal tendencies when they met, then a case could be argued that she found a victim that she could play with; i.e. save him from himself a few times to make herself look heroic, then basically murder him and get away with it (which fits the facts as presented by the bbc, except we don't know if he was like that when they met or not). That would be premeditated murder, but still, could you convict someone of murdering someone, when they physically didn't? It would be one hell of a lawyer to successfully prove premediated murder by proxy beyond reasonable doubt, where the proxy is the victim. Interestingly, the fact that she chose a judge and not a jury is indicative of that kind of cold, calculating mind as well. If it doesn't end up as a 'based on reality tv movie', various scenarios would make for a brilliant fictional courtroom drama.

 

Sadly, this is typical of those kind of BBC news stories that seem really interesting, but you never hear the end of, or many years later due to appeal system, etc.

 

I'd bet money she gets away with it, but I think she should get prison time, not sure life is warranted, but a decent sentence.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Aashenfox

[Willsy1980]

Exactly, if she knew in advance he was vulnerable, then he was specifically targeted. This all seems to be very calculated and the end goal was clearly her own morbid gratification.

Again as you said, choosing to stand in front of a judge was a predetermined, she had this all planned from day 1. That alone should be enough to see her guilty.

[Aashenfox]

Well, the Judge basically shafted her! good on the US justice system for once! That was quite swift.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40304433

[Willsy1980]

Justice prevails, doubt she will see 20 years but should get at least 15 but out in 10 at a guess.

[BobbyZ]

I'm gonna be brutally honest here and say that while what she did was crappy, ultimately he was responsible for his own life. I appreciate that some people will find my opinion distasteful.

[-G-]

I'm gonna be brutally honest here and say that while what she did was crappy, ultimately he was responsible for his own life. I appreciate that some people will find my opinion distasteful.

 

And wrong. The judge ruled that the fact that the victim had attempted suicide in the past or was likely to attempt it in the future had no bearing on her behaviour. It's a legal precedent and one I happen to agree with. As the prosecution put it;

 

"Back years ago in order to have a relationship you had to actually see somebody - or at a minimum talk on the phone. That is no longer required. People fall in love via the internet and via text. People bully via text and the internet. You can encourage someone to die via text, and you can commit a crime via text,"

 

This is the new reality we live in & laws are changing in response to it.

[-G-]

Also, it's quite obvious that the victim was emotionally vulnerable, probably suffering from some form of mental health disorder.

 

Looking​ at it through that prism, imagine instead of a kid he was a wealthy middle aged man suffering from depression or even the early onset of dementia, being encouraged to kill themselves by an unscrupulous family member? It's eventualities like these that prevent legal suicide hitting the statute books.

[BobbyZ]

I'm gonna be brutally honest here and say that while what she did was crappy, ultimately he was responsible for his own life. I appreciate that some people will find my opinion distasteful.

 

And wrong. The judge ruled that the fact that the victim had attempted suicide in the past or was likely to attempt it in the future had no bearing on her behaviour. It's a legal precedent and one I happen to agree with. As the prosecution put it;

 

"Back years ago in order to have a relationship you had to actually see somebody - or at a minimum talk on the phone. That is no longer required. People fall in love via the internet and via text. People bully via text and the internet. You can encourage someone to die via text, and you can commit a crime via text,"

 

This is the new reality we live in & laws are changing in response to it.

 

I agree with all of that - there was nothing in my post about previous attempts or the nature of their relationship.

[Zeezeebaba]

The young woman here is mentally ill by the looks of it. Certainly a nasty piece of work. Assisted suicide in the case of terminally ill patients I agree with. Assisting in the death and offering encouragement to someone to kill themselves is scheming and manipulative especially when they are physically OK.

In my opinion she received less than she deserved!