““Please stand,” Moniz said. When he declared Michelle Carter guilty, she looked confused and asked Joe Cataldo what it all meant.”
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/06/16/three-little-words-sunk-michelle-carter/7MgZibLEgQ7As6zvNOaDJI/story.html
She still doesn’t get it!
Evil? I don’t think so. These were two seriously disturbed teens whose mental illnesses fed upon one another. It was a tragic twist of fate that brought them together. I hope she gets the help she needs.
Prisons aren’t known for good mental health care.
I am torn but tilting toward not illegal. I agree that she needs mental health help. The whole phone relationship was two disturbed kids feeding off each other but I think it is a slippery slope to create a legal precedent with this case.
Will be interesting to see what happens on appeal.
I think it is a stretch to say that Carter is mentally ill and needs “help.” Some people are just bad and do not need or want help to change that. The defense tried to say that she was “incapacitated” by medication side effects and paid the quack anti-psychiatrist Peter Breggin to testify that Celexa made her do it which is preposterous.
This internet mischief with teens (and adults) happens all the time. Criminalizing words is a bad idea. Making someone culpable for the actions of someone else based on speech is a bad idea. The guy who killed himself was messed up. He was 18 and carrying on an internet relationship with a minor female and talking about suicide all the time. Each fed off the other. Although messed up, it is not criminal.
With this verdict in mind, imagine all of the prosecutions taking place if Romeo and Juliet had lived in Boston? I suppose we will hear new wife-beater defenses now that “she made me do it” with her words - go ahead, hit me. I hope we get back to a place of individual responsibility for behavior.
The judge’s decision though was not just based on her words. He articulated that it was also what she failed to do – call for help when she knew with certainty he was going to kill himself. Very similar to some of the defendants in the Timothy Piazza case – they are being charged with involuntary manslaughter for failing to call for help when Piazza was dying in front of them.
Yes, these are hard ones. But but attributing responsibility for or causation of one’s behavior to the words (or even lack of words) of others is not a good legal idea regardless of the impulse to hold someone else accountable.
@Hanna -
Can texting be considered a “physical act?”
I am less torn on the First Amendment aspects. I think her failure to summon help for him during the actual suicide meets the standard of reckless and wanton disregard for human life, separate and apart from whether she had the Constitutional right to tell him to get back into the car. Regardless, I think she is a sociopath and that she is hopefully going away for a long time, especially if she never has a cell phone again.
I agree @Wisdad23 that these are hard cases which no doubt will lead to differing views on the outcome. But the prosecution did not need to prove “causation” and the judge acknowledged that the prosecution did not prove she caused his death. The legal standard for involuntary manslaughter is as noted above a “reckless and wanton disregard for human life.” When I look at her conduct and words under that standard I can see how the judge arrived at the conviction.
I agree with HarvestMoon1 that there are some parallels to the Penn State case. It’s intriguing and the heart of the question in my mind is when does self-harm or self-destructive behavior meet other individuals obligations to protect that person from themself. So “here have another beer” is akin to “get back in that truck.” It’s a slippery slope though.
If she is actually a sociopath, no amount of “help” will make her a good person. That personality disorder is very very resistant to change.
The result in the Bill Cosby trial is also causing me to rethink my agreement with the Michelle Carter conviction.
While i am not a lawyer and so cannot say anything about the judge’s reasoning and decision-making, I wasn’t surprised by the decision. It will be interested to see what happens with the appeal.
I don’t know if she would fit the definition of sociopath but from what I’ve read she cast herself as somewhat of a victim as in “poor me, my boyfriend committed suicide” and became the center of attention to host a suicide prevention fundraiser event.