GUILTY MA - Conrad Roy, 18, urged by friend, commits suicide, Fairhaven, 13 July 2014 #2 *guilty*

[SuperTmo]

Yes. Hard to believe...

I wonder if she has attempted to accomplish ANYTHING the last few years since Conrad's death. We know she attended the prom and went to Disney... did she start college? Does she work? Or is she living life sleeping the days away mooching off her parents? If she was my kid, living under my roof, she would be busting her buns on a daily basis in order to attempt to show the court that she has something going for her.

Conrad had so much going for him. I wish he had realized that.

 

[SuperTmo]

It was a very short trial with barely any witnesses. The witnesses they did have all just read text messages really...so by the time he went deliberate I'm sure he had a direction in mind, really. It's not like the defense put on a lengthy show. Hard to fight when you are battling your clients own words in print I'd imagine. Only defense they had was she wasn't there and he was suicidal.

Agreed! The defense had to argue to have their witness heard, so I assume the Judge was already familiar with what he was going to say. IMO he was probably leaning one way or another before the trial began. Hopefully he is checking the guilty as charged box.

 

[monkeypants]

I wonder if she has attempted to accomplish ANYTHING the last few years since Conrad's death. We know she attended the prom and went to Disney... did she start college? Does she work? Or is she living life sleeping the days away mooching off her parents? If she was my kid, living under my roof, she would be busting her buns on a daily basis in order to attempt to show the court that she has something going for her.

Conrad had so much going for him. I wish he had realized that.

I would think defense would harp on it if so....I didn't hear anything to that effect tho.

 

[neesaki]

I don't see how she can't be found culpable for contributing to his death. Those thousands of text messages are some pretty damning evidence. She's just not a very sympathetic character. Sure she's young but I would hope the judge makes a (fair) decision to demonstrate this sort of conduct isn't acceptable under any circumstances and will not be tolerated in the future.

Hopefully the judge is thinking "let's get her now, before she does this to someone else, or worse".

 

[neesaki]

Earlier there was discussion that the judge's decision could take weeks or months to be announced because the case sets a precedent and he would have to write a long decision. The speed of announcing his verdict has me a little concerned. But perhaps this case seems straightforward to the judge and he was mulling it over and drafting his decision while the trial was going on (to be revised if necessary). How could he not draw conclusions in court?! Here's hoping he has found her guilty.

What do we know about this judge? Anyone?

 

[rosesfromangels]

CNN reports the judge will render the decision tomorrow. Pundits are stating there is no law in MA that addresses the issue. I agree with that assessment. I think she will walk.

Let's hope whatever the legal outcome, this girl will receive intensive mental assessment and treatment. My amateur opinion is that she should be closely monitored.

Amateur speculation and opinion only.

 

[monkeypants]

I saw some online chatter from experts who said this judge is more of a traditionalist but doesn't like to make waves or break new ground. I truly hope they are wrong.

Someone posted a fact sheet on him a page or so ago...

 

[DexterMorgan]

My guess is that since this case could set a precedence, he is reviewing everything and preparing a thorough written explanation for his decision - siting references, etc. That can take a while. JMO

True. But he knew case, the text evidence and the law for 1 to 3 years already.

So his reasons should have been known already. Jmo

 

[Safeguard]

I saw some online chatter from experts who said this judge is more of a traditionalist but doesn't like to make waves or break new ground. I truly hope they are wrong.

Someone posted a fact sheet on him a page or so ago...

Uhhgg. Well that sucks. Judges usually get their reps, for good reason. If he is "known" to rule status quo he probably will in this case too...

 

[Tigerlily75]

I feel like it does fit in with current law, of wanton and reckless behavior causing death, as well as failing to act (to get help) but again I'm not a lawyer.

I feel that both Conrad and Michelle are responsible for his death, and that just because Conrad owns some responsibility in his own death, doesn't mean Michelle owns none, and she should be punished. I don't think it breaks new ground as such, it's just unusual - and a new era - that she did it virtually instead of being physically present.

I 100% believe Conrad would not have killed himself on that particular day, if not for Michelle's deliberate and intentional behavior. Whether he would have done it on another day, of his own accord, is entirely irrelevant, as that is speculation only. And you certainly can't participate in killing someone "because they'll probably do it another time anyway".

Just my thoughts..

 

[Safeguard]

I would think defense would harp on it if so....I didn't hear anything to that effect tho.

They can't really harp on how sane, focused and ambitious she is... Kinda contradictory to their argument...

 

[Safeguard]

I feel like it does fit in with current law, of wanton and reckless behavior causing death, as well as failing to act (to get help) but again I'm not a lawyer.

I feel that both Conrad and Michelle are responsible for his death, and that just because Conrad owns some responsibility in his own death, doesn't mean Michelle owns none, and she should be punished. I don't think it breaks new ground as such, it's just unusual - and a new era - that she did it virtually instead of being physically present.

I 100% believe Conrad would not have killed himself on that particular day, if not for Michelle's deliberate and intentional behavior. Whether he would have done it on another day, of his own accord, is entirely irrelevant, as that is speculation only. And you certainly can't participate in killing someone "because they'll probably do it another time anyway".

Just my thoughts..

bbm
And mine as well!

 

[gitana1]

I think a bench decision would be faster than a jury since there is no one to convince or haggle with or the requests for evidence review etc. it's a streamlined process imo. No breaks or juror concerns as far as tampering etc.

Makes sense.

I can't really go back and read right now but didn't she suggest it and then basically ridicule him about how he would screw up his attempt by not sealing the hose from his exhaust pipe to his truck window well enough or something? Basically telling him how he would fail to do it right before he even tried? Which made them land on the generator idea to begin with? Gosh, this is so beyond gross.

She was so intent on him killing himself. She's creepy and dangerous.

I really hope she get a the harshest possible sentence, but I believe she will get what you stated here.

☹️

Gitana, I'm sorry I don't know the page numbers. She told a few friends the story in text, some were a direct copy and paste from what she told one friend to another. I remember she told SB, and also couple of the other female friends she was texting with. Had to skim read through a LOT of texts about food!

Thank you!

I feel like it does fit in with current law, of wanton and reckless behavior causing death, as well as failing to act (to get help) but again I'm not a lawyer.

I feel that both Conrad and Michelle are responsible for his death, and that just because Conrad owns some responsibility in his own death, doesn't mean Michelle owns none, and she should be punished. I don't think it breaks new ground as such, it's just unusual - and a new era - that she did it virtually instead of being physically present.

I 100% believe Conrad would not have killed himself on that particular day, if not for Michelle's deliberate and intentional behavior. Whether he would have done it on another day, of his own accord, is entirely irrelevant, as that is speculation only. And you certainly can't participate in killing someone "because they'll probably do it another time anyway".

Just my thoughts..

I'm with you. I don't see it as precedent setting. Was her conduct reckless. Did it cause her death. Nothing bizarre.

Its like saying you can't convict someone of murder if they stabbed someone to death because there is no specific statute against stabbing someone to death. But that act is murder. And the act here is or may be involuntary manslaughter.

Here's another analogy. What if she had taken a delusional schizophrenic man who thought the government was trying to kill him, up to a roof, and told him
that the CIA was coming to capture them and torture them to death and the only way out was to jump? Is that reckless behavior that causes him to die?

 

[gitana1]

bbm
And mine as well!

Me three.

 

[Tigerlily75]

Not sure if this has been posted, but if you scroll down there are links to the transcripts of the texts etc

http://www.wcvb.com/article/evidence-from-the-trial-of-michelle-carter/10011731

 

[Jewels53]

[video=twitter;875652769721405441]https://twitter.com/JuliannePeixoto/status/875652769721405441[/video]


If the judge finds MC guilty I doubt he would sentence her to 20 yrs.

 

[KaaBoom]

11 am Eastern. Anyone care to comment on how they think he might rule? I'm leaning toward not guilty because there was always the option for Conrad to cease communicating with her. Plus, with so many people calling her a liar, there is the possibility she lied when telling her friend that she told him to get back in the car. For me, the possibility that he never exited the car and got back in could be reasonable doubt. There is no doubt she's morally bankrupt, but ....... I still have questions.

50/50 I have learned that any criminal case can go either way, no matter how good the evidence is. This case is especially complicated. This being a bench trial, I know the judge will decide based on what the relevant laws say. In my opinion I don't see how she could not be guilty of manslaughter, at the very least. But I don't think I understand all the laws well enough to predict what this judge is going to decide. So I think it could go either way.

 

[KaaBoom]

But all of this evidence wasn't available. You can't even start to put her name into google without the case blaring out...it's forever. When she went to prom and Disney etc none of this was truly known. She had sympathy.

She can change her name. In 10 or 20 years even Google will start to forget about this case anyway.

 

[Jewels53]

[video=twitter;875676298903003136]https://twitter.com/JuliannePeixoto/status/875676298903003136[/video]

To me this makes the charge much clearer. I would find her guilty! jmo

 

[HRP]

She can change her name. In 10 or 20 years even Google will start to forget about this case anyway.

True. But, imo, currently (and in near future) all this attention (even though negative), is "food" to a narcissistic sociopathic personality. And there will be (if not now) lots of big paying interviews lined up.

IF the above could apply to her, could the judge state "no profit can be realized by defendant and her family (books, interviews, movies, etc)"?