Define “directly resulted in his death”.
If I said, “Madsircool, end yourself” and then you do kill yourself am I the one who should be held accountable?
If this ISN’T ‘depraved indifference’, I can’t imagine what is. And, since depraved indifference IS a crime, yes, she ought to go to jail.
If:
You actively encourage me several times
You know I am suicidal
You tell me to get into an exhaust-filled car
You are a close friend
Then yes imo.
If it was a one-off joke, then no. Context is important here.
The context also is that she cared for him and genuinely believed suicide would alleviate his suffering. Is it thoughtcrime to hold this belief? Or only to express the opinion out loud?
This way lies madness. Or more precisely, fascism.
Fascism??? Lol
Genuinely caring for him would be calling his local 911 and asking for help. She didn’t just express an opinion, she actively encouraged him to take his life. Medical care could have eleviated his suffering.
You are making my point for me. Only the form of caring for someone that you approve of should be legal.
Gotta kill him to save him!! He wasn’t in a state of mind to make an informed decision. I believe that there should be a place where people can go who no longer wish to live. But they should be examined and offered help first. He was in the morning of his life. He could have been saved in all likelihood.
I’m sure that an attorney could give a better explanation than I could, but my general understanding is that manslaughter comes into play when a person engages in conduct such that death is a foreseeable outcome. We’re not talking about a situation in which someone made a sarcastic comment or two that unwittingly sent someone over the edge. I admit that I haven’t followed this case that closely, but it seems like the main issue here is that this girl knew that he was vulnerable and showing intent to commit self-harm, and that any reasonable person would have known that the things that she communicated to him could result in any number of harmful outcomes, including death.
Well said. His death was preventable had she not pushed him into it.
A fellow at one side of the road waits for an approaching car and call over a little kid from the other side. Splat.
The next day, he repeats with another child.
And the next day, and the next day and the next days.
No one forced the children to listen to him and obey him, right Manson?
Facts: She told him many times to kill himself. He was killing himself through CO in a closed truck. He exited the truck and told her he was scared. She told him to get back into the truck. He got back in the truck. He died of the fumes.
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/involuntary-manslaughter-overview.html
Application of the facts to the element of the offence:
-
After he left the truck, she directed him to get back in, he obeyed, he died.
-
Given his state of mind in which he was in mid-suicide and scared, her telling him to re-enter the CO filled truck was both inherently dangerous to him and also done with reckless disregard for his life.
-
Her telling him many times to kill himself and him at the time having commenced killing himself, she should have known that telling him to get back in was a threat to his life.
All the elements of the offence of involuntary manslaughter were met, so the decision to find her guilty was correct provided that she did not have diminished capacity.
As far as Manson’s opinion goes, that she told him via text rather than in person or by video chat or by a bicycle delivery-boy in livery or by skywrighting while a wing-walker screamed down with a wing-mounted megaphone, is immaterial to the elements of the offence.
Your link is general purpose – but, as far as I can tell, in Massachusetts specifically, one of “the elements of the offense of involuntary manslaughter” is that the killing was unintentionally caused as a result of the defendant’s conduct.
Wasn’t his death intentionally caused as a result of the defendant’s conduct?
But I don’t dispute any of that, and neither does the ACLU. We dispute whether it constitutes a crime.
Just to clarify, manslaughter is not merely a matter of whether death is preventable or even whether an accidental somehow resulted in someone’s death. Involuntary manslaughter, for instance, is committed when someone behaves in a manner that could reasonably cause another person to die. Let’s consider two examples.
In one example, a driver sees a tree fall in the middle of the road, swerves out of the way, and accidentally sideswipes another car at an intersection, killing another driver. The driver’s behavior caused the death of another driver, for which he could still probably be sued. But his behavior wasn’t unreasonable, and thus it wasn’t criminal.
This contrasts with another example in which a driver is talking to a friend, fiddling with his satellite radio, or texting a friend while driving and sideswipes another driver, resulting in that driver’s death. Any reasonable person would understand that such behavior is dangerous and could result in death. Of course different states could have different terms and definitions of this act, and with different penalties.
I agree that this case presents shades of gray and I’m still not entirely sure if I feel that it constitutes manslaughter in the commonly understood sense, but if my understanding of the circumstances is correct (and it may not be), her behavior seems to be, at minimum, in the realm of grossly irresponsible, without regard for the welfare of another person’s life. And there’s a distinction between communication per se and communication as an action. A judge saw fit to allow her behavior to be considered as manslaughter, and a jury was convinced that this is exactly what it was. It’s entirely possible that a different judge and a different jury would have different conclusions.
There was no jury. One trial judge’s opinion is the whole ball of wax here.
Well, this happened in Massachusetts and here’s how “Involuntary Manslaughter” is defined in MA.
http://statelaws.findlaw.com/massachusetts-law/massachusetts-involuntary-manslaughter-and-motor-vehicle-homicid.html
Now, I’m not Bricker and if he or any of the actual lawyers could comment that would be great but it seems to me that “an unlawful killing” means that a killing with no legal excuse while breaking the law.
If there was no law in Massachusetts against talking someone into committing suicide and committing suicide isn’t illegal I don’t see how this could be considered from a legal perspective to be “an unlawful killing”.
Obviously she was morally reprehensible, but I don’t see how what she did could be legally considered “involuntary manslaughter” in the state of Massachusetts.
Again, if there are any lawyers on call, I’d love to hear their input.
Was there a killing? Yes
Was there wanton conduct? Yes
Thus involuntary conduct. If not the case would have been dismissed long ago.
If intentional, then it was murder. I’d be happy with that, but it is a lot easier to get a disturbed young woman convicted for unintentional manslaughter than for murder.
I stand corrected as to the facts, but I think the argument for manslaughter still exists. Again, though, I acknowledge this is something that might be out of my realm of expertise. Not a lawyer, not a Mass resident, and not completely sure on the facts of the case. Anyway, carry on. Interesting discussion all around.