Interesting Court Case
- Thread starter isufbcurt
- Start date
No idea, but what kind of piece of **** person encourages someone who is physically fine to kill themselves rather than seek help?
I hope the decision to waive a jury trial backfires on her.
Wow, lots of variables in that case.
Helping someone to commit suicide is NOT considered a crime in Mass? Good grief.
Helping someone to commit suicide is NOT considered a crime in Mass? Good grief.
I need more context. Were they broken up? Why was he in a fragile emotional state? Did he **** her sister or something? I have plenty of exes who'd probably encourage me to kill myself... 
Why wouldn't this fall under cyber bullying? According to Mass. law cyber bullying that results in death could bring felony charges.
that's an issue I have a hard time deciding on. I think for me it's a case by case basis.
In this case, that ***** be crazy.
The act itself was disgusting and her lack of remorse is sickening.
I just skimmed through a number of articles and couldn't find anything that says a person is required to talk a person out of suicide. And unless someone is a licensed physician or psychiatrist that was aware of a pre-existing condition and used their influence of their own patient, the act of encouraging a suicide by another person doesn't seem to hold a penalty.
She is guilty of being a despicable human being, but, unfortunately, I don't know of any legal ramifications she could face. It seems like her defense team could claim that there were other factors that contributed to the boy's mental state and make it hard to pin down to one specific event or series of events.
This seems like a brand new venue that the courts are going to need to rule on and the ruling is going to have to be worded meticulously. There are so many harshly worded comments on social media that, if taken literally and not in jest, would be grounds for future lawsuits.
Maybe @CloneLawman or @WooClone15 could shed some legal light on things?
I just skimmed through a number of articles and couldn't find anything that says a person is required to talk a person out of suicide. And unless someone is a licensed physician or psychiatrist that was aware of a pre-existing condition and used their influence of their own patient, the act of encouraging a suicide by another person doesn't seem to hold a penalty.
She is guilty of being a despicable human being, but, unfortunately, I don't know of any legal ramifications she could face. It seems like her defense team could claim that there were other factors that contributed to the boy's mental state and make it hard to pin down to one specific event or series of events.
This seems like a brand new venue that the courts are going to need to rule on and the ruling is going to have to be worded meticulously. There are so many harshly worded comments on social media that, if taken literally and not in jest, would be grounds for future lawsuits.
Maybe @CloneLawman or @WooClone15 could shed some legal light on things?
Where did you see that? I'm curious because this was where I went initially too, but I couldn't find anything that would relate to this case. All I found seemed like it was mostly geared at curbing cyberbullying in schools;
Harassment
In Massachusetts, harassment incurs a fine of up to $1,000, up to two years and six months in jail, or both. For second and subsequent offenses, the judge may elect to impose either up to two years and six months in jail, or up to ten years in state prison.
Edit: Never mind. Found this, unfortunately I'm not sure what precedent is there.
Massachusetts Penalties for Cyber Bullying
Cyber bullying is classified under the same penal laws as hate crimes, criminal harassment, and stalking. This means penalties for cyber bullying can be severe depending on the circumstances.
First time cyber bullying offenders will most likely face misdemeanor charges, depending on the circumstances and damages surrounding the case. If convicted as a misdemeanor the punishment can include the payment of fines and community service. For repeat offenders or cyber bullying that resulted in more sever damages, including victim injury or death, the suspect could face felony charges. Felony convictions apply to the “Three Strike Rule,” and can result in serious fines and significant jail time.
Last edited:
I was referencing what I read here.
What is Cyber Bullying?
The Attorney General of the State of Massachusetts classifies Cyber Bullying as “electronically communicated threats and willful and malicious directing electronic communications at a specific person that seriously alarm that person and would cause a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress.”
Children and Adults may be Charged with Cyber Bullying
Many feel that the problem with cyber bullying is that it does not end at the toll of the school bell or end of the work day. It continues every time the victim uses their smartphone, handheld device, or computer. This is why cyber bullying is considered an extreme form of harassment. The Massachusetts legislature has made laws regarding cyber bullying sweepingly severe, this means children to adults can be charged, convicted, and penalized for Cyber bullying crimes.
Massachusetts Penalties for Cyber Bullying
Cyber bullying is classified under the same penal laws as hate crimes, criminal harassment, and stalking. This means penalties for cyber bullying can be severe depending on the circumstances.
First time cyber bullying offenders will most likely face misdemeanor charges, depending on the circumstances and damages surrounding the case. If convicted as a misdemeanor the punishment can include the payment of fines and community service. For repeat offenders or cyber bullying that resulted in more sever damages, including victim injury or death, the suspect could face felony charges. Felony convictions apply to the “Three Strike Rule,” and can result in serious fines and significant jail time.
If you have questions about Massachusetts laws regarding bullying at school or the workplace, contact our attorneys for a case evaluation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...self-will-stand-trial/?utm_term=.2cac9c789ce7
My guess is she serves time - probably not nearly as much as she deserves.
My guess is she serves time - probably not nearly as much as she deserves.
I think if this were my son, you all would be discussing my murder trial
Exactly, I would think medical professionals should be protected. But to have blanket protection for everyone seems crazy.
I think its the right move for her. Chances are you're going to get a judge around 50-60 years of age who doesn't appreciate texting like a jury of her peers would. In the end, I doubt she will be convicted, but hopefully this follows her around for the rest of her life because she is not right.
It seems like this would be a relevant concept to this case. Interesting that Massachusetts has a law on the books of some sort in this regard (edit, not sure if that only applies to strangers? Odd that it would not apply to someone you know too).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue
"A duty to rescue is a concept in tort law that arises in a number of cases, describing a circumstance in which a party can be held liable for failing to come to the rescue of another party in peril. In common law systems, it is rarely formalized in statutes which would bring the penalty of law down upon those who fail to rescue. This does not necessarily obviate a moral duty to rescue: though law is binding and carries government-authorized sanctions, there are also separate ethical arguments for a duty to rescue that may prevail even where law does not punish failure to rescue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue
"A duty to rescue is a concept in tort law that arises in a number of cases, describing a circumstance in which a party can be held liable for failing to come to the rescue of another party in peril. In common law systems, it is rarely formalized in statutes which would bring the penalty of law down upon those who fail to rescue. This does not necessarily obviate a moral duty to rescue: though law is binding and carries government-authorized sanctions, there are also separate ethical arguments for a duty to rescue that may prevail even where law does not punish failure to rescue.
- In the United States, as of 2009 ten states had laws on the books requiring that people at least notify law enforcement of and/or seek aid for strangers in peril under certain conditions: California,[10][11] Florida,[10][12][13] Hawaii,[10][14]Massachusetts,[10][15] Minnesota,[10][16] Ohio,[10][17] Rhode Island,[10][18] Vermont,[10][19] Washington,[10][20][21] and Wisconsin.[10][22] These laws are also referred to as Good Samaritan laws, despite their difference from laws of the same name that protect individuals who try to help another person.[1] These laws are rarely applied, and are generally ignored by citizens and lawmakers.[1]"
