Why Michelle Carter was properly convicted of helping his human friend commit suicide

A judge in Massachusetts recently found defendant 20 years old Michelle
Carter guilty of manslaughter in the death of her boyfriend & # 8221;
Conrad Roy III. The case drew national attention because of the unusual
circumstances surrounding Roy's death. Media comments focused on the fact
that the role of Roy Carter in death revolved around the huge volume of
text messages she sent to him before and during his suicide. Many voices
have mistakenly saw this case as a kind of freedom of expression and #
8221; problem; but a closer examination of the facts if painted in a very
different light. It was the act of a malevolent puppetmaster who handled a
sick man right in his own grave.
Although Carter had used electronic communications to push Roy in suicide,
the fact remains that communications remained a blatant contempt and
totally without pity for the safety of a man with mental health problems.
In the opinion of this writer, Carter displayed behavior of a level of
malice conscious premeditation that would & # 8211; and perhaps should have
& # 8211; justify a charge of murder.
Facts
On July 13, 2014, Roy was found dead in the parking lot of a Kmart store.
He was 20 at the time; Carter was 17. Investigators soon focused their
attention on a large volume of text messages that were exchanged between
the two. According to prosecutors, between July 6 and July 12, Roy Carter
molested more than 40 times with text messages, asking when he planned to
kill himself. She knew that Roy had a history of depression and illness (he
had attempted suicide in 2012). It is important to note that these messages
are not only questions they were insistent calls, shrill for him to end his
life. She ordered him to carbon monoxide poisoning as the most effective
way to end his life. It's not a big deal, she told him.
Carter displayed a shocking level of wickedness and cruelty
Roy made his last phone call to Carter while driving his suicide plans;
this call lasted about 43 minutes. Carter Roy called back; This call lasted
47 minutes. At one point, Roy broke his plan; he got out of the car and
told him he could not go through it. Turn the fucking car, was his answer.
Roy did, and he died shortly after. In a text to a friend after Roy's
death, Carter said bluntly,
His death is my fault & # 8230; Like, honestly I could have stopped it. I
was the one the phone with him and he got out of the car because [he] was
working and he was afraid and I told her fucken come back in ... because I
knew he would do all over again the next day and I could not make him live
the way he lived longer.
 She used Conrad as a pawn in his sick game of death, the prosecutor said
in court. Carter's defense attorney, Joseph Cataldo, tried to paint a
different picture of what happened. Presentation of the victim's
psychiatric records, he argued that Roy was ready to commit suicide, with
or without outside help.
The defense also argued that Carter's own emotional problems were a
mitigating factor in the case. His use of antidepressant drugs, according
to his lawyer, could impair his judgment. Cataldo also tried to cast his
client as a passive spectator, saying it's no action. He took his own life.
He took all the necessary steps to cause his own death & # 8221. However,
the court was not convinced by these arguments. Carter was convicted of
manslaughter.
Comment
legal and social experts immediately keen on the nature of text messaging
the case. With his usual talent for missing the point, the American Civil
Liberties Union has thundered that the matter of freedom of expression
threaten, as if this case was not protected speech. It's not.
Every criminal lawyer can confirm that many crimes can be committed with
only words: criminal threat for crime, solicitation, extortion and even
plot. In the right circumstances, these crimes can be consumed by the
emission of words alone. It is immaterial whether the words are held
orally, in a text message, by written letter or pigeon.
Attempts to take this case as a kind of freedom of expression and # 8221;
questions are therefore totally inappropriate. In addition, it can not be
said that Carter's role was one of a passive spectator. Quite the opposite
is true. The evidence shows that Carter took an active role in commanding
the King's death. She helped him to plan, she tracked down the run, and & #
8211; & # 8211 more shockingly, she ordered him back into the car filled
with carbon monoxide when he was removed from his plan. His role in Roy's
death was one of the causes close; but it is for his actions, suicide as
happened would not have happened.
Conrad Roy
Under the legal doctrine of proximate cause, something can be said & # 8221
causes; something else when it is sufficiently close in time and space to
make a certain result predictable & # 8221; some action. Although Carter
had not ordered Roy back into the jaws of death (the poisoned car), there
was sufficient evidence probably all other text messages to a conviction
for manslaughter.
Admittedly, provided that the defendant's conduct concerned, there are no
mitigating factors in this case. Essentially orchestrate Roy's death,
Carter displayed a level of malice and cruelty is nothing less than
shocking. This is a person without moral compass, a person for whom the
normal feelings of compassion and kindness are quite foreign. It probably
weighed heavily on the court's decision.
The phrase says it all: a ruthless disregard for the safety and the lives
of others
It clearly derives a sick sort of satisfaction act as Roy's angel of death.
Hovering constantly around him, it operates a man confused, vulnerable and
impaired to be felt a sense of power. Some people are quite skewed to find
pleasure in playing God with people's lives, and this case was a perfect
example.
His behavior after his death make clear that it intends to exploit the
tragedy (she herself had designed) for its own purposes of seeking
attention. It was behavior that was pure evil, implying a level of planning
and wickedness that go beyond a scenario of unintended accidental culpable
homicide.
The case was determined. Sentencing, the court must take note of the
non-mixed nature of the defendant's conduct, and transmit an appropriate
sentence. Probation is not appropriate in this case.
Read more: Why Modern Men need to develop a passion for life