HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Supreme Court rejects app...

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 12:54 PM

Supreme Court rejects appeal in texting suicide case

Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday left in place the conviction of a Massachusetts woman who sent her boyfriend text messages urging him to kill himself.

Michelle Carter is serving a 15-month sentence after being convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the 2014 death of her boyfriend, Conrad Roy III. A judge determined that Carter, who was 17, caused the death of the 18-year-old Roy when she ordered him in a phone call to get back in his carbon monoxide-filled truck that he’d parked in a Kmart parking lot.

The phone call wasn’t recorded, but the judge relied on a text Carter sent her friend in which she said she told Roy to get back in. In text messages sent in the days leading up to Roy’s death, Carter also encouraged Roy to follow through with his suicide plan and chastised him when he didn’t, Massachusetts courts found.

The case has garnered national attention and sparked legislative proposals in Massachusetts to criminalize suicide coercion.



FILE - In this Sept. 19, 2019, file photo, Michelle Carter, center, arrives for a parole hearing in Natick, Mass. The state's highest court upheld Carter's 2017 involuntary manslaughter conviction in the suicide death of her despondent boyfriend, to whom she had sent insistent text messages urging him to take his own life. The state Parole Board also denied her request for early release. (AP Photo/Steven Senne, File)


Read more: https://apnews.com/cc38e0b9f4449773babb929e58706301

12 replies, 1395 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 12 replies Author Time Post
Reply Supreme Court rejects appeal in texting suicide case (Original post)
Omaha Steve Jan 13 OP
bucolic_frolic Jan 13 #1
GemDigger Jan 13 #2
bucolic_frolic Jan 13 #3
mountain grammy Jan 13 #4
bucolic_frolic Jan 13 #5
moriah Jan 13 #6
bucolic_frolic Jan 13 #7
GemDigger Jan 13 #8
eggplant Jan 13 #10
Sucha NastyWoman Jan 13 #9
GeorgiaPeanut Jan 14 #11
marble falls Jan 14 #12

Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 01:10 PM

1. I doubt how much "coercion" went on here

You can encourage someone to break the speed limit, or overcook causing nitrosamines, and you're off Scot free in both instances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #1)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 01:40 PM

2. When someone is suicidal and suffering from depression

you don't tell them to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GemDigger (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 01:55 PM

3. She was a 17 year old psychologist?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #3)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 02:24 PM

4. No just a 17 year old evil person

who, in my opinion, belongs in prison because she’s a threat to society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 02:25 PM

5. "Go jump in the lake!"

should land everyone in jail after this ruling

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 02:46 PM

6. No, only when said to a person you know...

... can't swim and has a cinderblock tied to their legs right then.

(That was judge's ruling -- nothing she said until she told him to get back until the carbon monoxide-filled truck, that she knew was filled with CO, mattered.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moriah (Reply #6)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 04:35 PM

7. Not to defend her evil words or intent

but she wasn't there at the scene. So she had to believe a suicidal person, whom I would think is not considered rational. Maybe she only partially believed him. I'm not really clear how you keep the fumes inside a vehicle in a parking lot. Was he known to, or did he say, he funneled it in from the tailpipe? Did she think he was bluffing, or did she think she was calling his bluff. I didn't follow the case, so I don't know the details.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 05:00 PM

8. "so I don't know the details."

Maybe you should do some research on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 11:16 PM

10. For someone who didn't follow the case, you sure have some strong opinions about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moriah (Reply #6)

Mon Jan 13, 2020, 07:21 PM

9. That is what makes this very different

To deny that this went ov er the line of what it means to be human, is to deny that depression exists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Tue Jan 14, 2020, 12:21 AM

11. This was to be expected

Free speech right is no absolute and there is precedent for that.

Inciting someone to commit a violent act can never be "free speech" and that defense was weak.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GeorgiaPeanut (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 14, 2020, 12:31 AM

12. All free speech is, is a guarantee of no prior restraint. Once the comment is made it is subject ...

to law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread