# Woman found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in text/ suicide case **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 16, 2017, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122 "2017-06-16T15:42:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/181 "2017-06-20T00:59:39Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > In short, I think your general view and understanding of the law is incorrect. If you are arguing that the law is wrong and that such conduct, however irresponsible it might be, ought not to be regulated, then that’s your right, but it’s not necessarily legally valid. Did you even read what you quoted before replying? I made it clear I was not interested in arguing what the law is, as opposed to general civil-libertarian principles; and I specifically followed that up with “if the law was followed perfectly here, the law is wrong.” ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/182 "2017-06-20T02:37:07Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Did you even read what you quoted before replying? I made it clear I was not interested in arguing what the law is, as opposed to general civil-libertarian principles; and I specifically followed that up with “if the law was followed perfectly here, the law is wrong.” Yeah, I did read what I quoted – did you? ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/183 "2017-06-20T02:40:06Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > Yeah, I did read what I quoted – did you? Whatever: it was pretty clear it was you, not I, who lost the plot. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/184 "2017-06-20T02:53:24Z")
Plot? . . . . Plot? Another conspiracy? Ah, crap. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/185 "2017-06-20T03:05:43Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Sounds like an excluded middle. The law recognizes that in _some_ cases, people can be held accountable for the actions they’ve influenced others to take. Enabling drunk driving and criminal mischief in kids are good examples. Don’t forget attractive nuisance. And that’s passive influence. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/186 "2017-06-20T03:45:50Z")
Justice Robert Jackson, three-quarters of a century ago (emphasis mine): > [@](#): > > We can have intellectual individualism and the rich cultural diversities that we owe to exceptional minds only at the price of occasional eccentricity and abnormal attitudes. When they are so harmless to others or to the State as those we deal with here, the price is not too great. **But freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom.** The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order. > > If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/187 "2017-06-20T12:34:16Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > A prosecutor would have to establish that you were acting with an unreasonable disregard for someone’s safety. If you say “Well I thought he just had a beer and he seemed fine to me,” I seriously doubt that this is criminal behavior. However, if you watched him guzzle a bottle of whiskey and watch him stumble into his car and encourage him to drive in a drunken state, then that’s a different matter I couldn’t WATCH him do anything, since I was texting him from 3000 miles away. How would I know that he REALLY drank the beers? How would I know how “fine” he seemed to be? I couldn’t HAND him the keys, since, you know, I wasn’t physically there. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/188 "2017-06-20T12:38:30Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > I think your fundamental understanding of the laws regarding manslaughter and/or negligent homicide are simply wrong. Now if you want to argue that the laws as they are and as they have been interpreted by courts for decades and even centuries are also wrong, that might be another thread of discussion. I think your grouping of someone physically being present and someone texting over a phone is simply wrong. And I’ve stated it’s my opinion. In my opinion, if I texted someone 1000 times to “Punch yourself in the face” and then they punched themselves in the face, I don’t, in my opinion, feel that I’ve committed assault or attempted assault, or involuntary assault or any type of assault. You may feel different. If I was physically present, and told someone to “Punch yourself in the face” then it becomes more of a threat and/or coercion since they may feel threatened if they don’t do it. Texting? I don’t feel the same way, since they could simply turn their phone off and no longer receive the texts. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/189 "2017-06-20T12:40:25Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > Here’s a real-world example: > > Two sisters came to visit one of the fellows upstairs in our frat, leaving their younger sister (just under the age of majority of 18) downstairs in the common area where a couple of us were studying. Well she was a noisy annoying git, so my buddy told her to “Go play in traffic.” > > So she did. > > And she got hit by a city bus This is a tragic story, but seems irrelevant since the guy didn’t text her “Go play in traffic” from 1000s of miles away. He was physically present to tell her that. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/190 "2017-06-20T12:46:38Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > I couldn’t WATCH him do anything, since I was texting him from 3000 miles away. How would I know that he REALLY drank the beers? How would I know how “fine” he seemed to be? I couldn’t HAND him the keys, since, you know, I wasn’t physically there. Yeah, and how would a murder defendant know that when he/she pulled the trigger, their gun would release a bullet? And how would they know that the person they were pointing the gun towards would remain standing in the path of that bullet? And how would they know someone could die if they aimed a loaded a gun at them and pulled the trigger? These things have to be impossible to prove in court, right? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/191 "2017-06-20T13:36:38Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > One of the nice things about common law is that over time, fundamentals survive, new needs get met, changes in circumstances get accommodated, and irrelevancies get dropped. At each step of the way the judicial decisions can be tested. It certainly remains open for someone in a similar case to argue that physical presence is one of the elements that must be proven as in 1870, and then both sides will give their arguments. One of the fundamental principles of criminal law is that the law must clearly convey what conduct is prohibited. Due process requires this; a law that fails to adequately give notice as to what conduct it prohibits is void for vagueness. If the courts read into the common law an element of physical presence, then isn’t the populace entitled to rely on that? A person seeking to conform his conduct to the law can urge suicide by texting, believing the law is broken only with physical presence. We might imagine that the courts can modify this requirement, since it is of their making, but only prospectively. Thoughts? ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/192 "2017-06-20T14:33:48Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > One of the fundamental principles of criminal law is that the law must clearly convey what conduct is prohibited. I found this: > [@](#): > > There is no statutory definition of manslaughter. The elements of the crime are derived from the common law. Commonwealth v. Webster, [5 Cush. 295](http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/59/59mass295.html) , 303 (1850). The common law development in the area has resulted in the definition of two distinct forms of manslaughter. So called voluntary manslaughter, see Commonwealth v. Soaris, 275 Mass. 291 , 299 (1931), is a form of manslaughter clearly not implicated in the instant case and it need not be discussed. Involuntary manslaughter is “an unlawful homicide unintentionally caused by an act which constitutes such a disregard of probable harmful consequences to another as to amount to wanton or reckless conduct.” Commonwealth v. Vanderpool, [367 Mass. 743](http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/374/374mass120.html) , 747 (1975). See Commonwealth v. Campbell, [352 Mass. 387](http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/352/352mass387.html) , 397 (1967). The Commonwealth has an interest that persons within its territory should not be killed by the wanton and reckless conduct of others. Commonwealth v. Atencio, [345 Mass. 627](http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/345/345mass627.html) , 629 (1963). The interests sought to be protected are readily distinguishable from the interests protected by the imposition of legal duties and the standards for determining their breach which have shaped the law of civil liability. [Note 2] [http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/374/374mass120.html](http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/374/374mass120.html) The defendant was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. From the first quote above: > [@](#): > > Involuntary manslaughter is "an unlawful homicide His suicide was a homicide. Texting can’t also have been a homicide. > [@](#): > > unintentionally caused by an act… Her act of texting and what she texted was clearly intentional. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/193 "2017-06-20T14:55:56Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Yeah, and how would a murder defendant know that when he/she pulled the trigger, their gun would release a bullet? And how would they know that the person they were pointing the gun towards would remain standing in the path of that bullet? And how would they know someone could die if they aimed a loaded a gun at them and pulled the trigger? > > These things have to be impossible to prove in court, right? Not seeing the parallel. Prosecutor: “Did you know he was drunk?” Me: “How would I know? I wasn’t even there.” ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/194 "2017-06-20T17:58:11Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > His suicide was a homicide. Leaving aside the fact that “homicide” is just about never used that way, you also elided the fact that your cite said “_unlawful_ homicide”. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/195 "2017-06-20T18:07:42Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Leaving aside the fact that “homicide” is just about never used that way [Law.com](http://Law.com) defines suicide as a type of homicide: > [@](#): > > Suicide is a homicide > **[Legal Dictionary - Law.com](https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=881)** > > ALM's Law.com online Real Life Dictionary of the Law. The easiest-to-read, most user-friendly guide to legal terms. Use it free! > [@](#): > > you also elided the fact that your cite said “_unlawful_ homicide”. I quoted it verbatim and left “unlawful” in. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/196 "2017-06-20T18:10:59Z")
I didn’t mean you elided it in your quote, but in your response. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/197 "2017-06-20T19:10:53Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Not seeing the parallel. > > Prosecutor: “Did you know he was drunk?” > > Me: “How would I know? I wasn’t even there.” The parallel is that prosecutors use _evidence_ to infer what a defendant knows. The [reasonable person standard](http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+person+standard) could also be used to establish what the defendant should’ve known or done. So sure, you might answer “How would I know they were drunk?”. But if there’s a long chain of text messages that have the victim telling you he’s drunk, and there’s texts from you acknowledging your belief in that (“yup, you seem drunk af, lol”), then any later assertions that you didn’t know will look like lies. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/198 "2017-06-20T19:37:05Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > The parallel is that prosecutors use _evidence_ to infer what a defendant knows. The [reasonable person standard](http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+person+standard) could also be used to establish what the defendant should’ve known or done. > > So sure, you might answer “How would I know they were drunk?”. But if there’s a long chain of text messages that have the victim telling you he’s drunk, and there’s texts from you acknowledging your belief in that (“yup, you seem drunk af, lol”), then any later assertions that you didn’t know will look like lies. I guess. But if you can use what a person texts as a way to discern whether or not they were too drunk to drive, then you have better senses I do. Good luck with that. Can I text you next time I’ve been drinking so you can tell me if I can drive or not? Also, I’ll need your name so I can give to the cops as the person who said I was sober enough to drive based on nothing but text messages. In fact, I bet the cops just stop with side of the road sobriety tests and breathalyzers and just use text messages to see if people are under the influence. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/199 "2017-06-20T20:21:18Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > I guess. But if you can use what a person texts as a way to discern whether or not they were too drunk to drive, then you have better senses I do. Good luck with that. If I can tell when certain posters on the SDMB are too drunk to post safely, I can certainly ascertain that a close friend whose texting style and habits I’m well acquainted with is too plastered to drive safely. Of all things to treat as too mysterious to reliably infer from a text message, drunkenness is not one of them. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2017, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122/200 "2017-06-20T22:07:56Z")
I’m waiting for a naked monkey butler to run through the thread. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-found-guilty-of-involuntary-manslaughter-in-text-suicide-case/789122.md?page=11)