MA - Conrad Roy, 18, urged by friend, commits suicide, Fairhaven, 13 July 2014

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Attorneys refer to each other as "brother" or "sister" in Court in Massachusetts.
 
It is a form of courtesy and is regional.

Of course since it is regional we often don't hear this so it is surprising to hear.
 
[video=youtube;N7CiczzKLhA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7CiczzKLhA[/video]

Michelle Carter Trial DAY 2 PART 1
 
[video=youtube;QtHsB1qp5Fk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtHsB1qp5Fk[/video]



Michelle Carter Trial DAY 2 PART 2
 
minor4th said:
I only watched the opening statements. Michelle's behavior is cruel and abusive, but I don't know that Massachusetts has an offense that really fits her actions. Wouldn't be surprised if she's acquitted. Wouldn't be too surprised if she's convicted either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

Well they certainly didn't overcharge her. But I think they got her on involuntary manslaughter, even though it's true- it doesn't totally fit because she DID intend for him to die. But I think it still works. They don't have to prove it was unintentional:

In order to obtain a conviction of Involuntary Manslaughter, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the following legal elements:

  1. That the defendant caused an unlawful, while unintentional, killing. In other words, there was no legal justification for the killing (such as self-defense,) and the defendant intended to commit the act or conduct that ultimately caused the death. However, the prosecution does not need to prove that the defendant intended to cause the death that resulted from his conduct;
  2. That the victim’s death was caused by wanton or reckless conduct, meaning that the defendant's actions created a high degree of likelihood that substantial and serious harm would result to another person; and
  3. The wanton or reckless conduct that the defendant engaged in, in fact caused the victim’s death.
https://criminal.attorneywdkickham.com/involuntary-manslaughter.html

And her attorneys filed a motion to dismiss already. I think in 2015. The court denied it rejecting defense arguments that this was not a crime but free speech. She then appealed the ruling. The appellate court ruled that the charges were proper and the case could proceed. http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2017/05/michelle_carter_trial_to_start.html

So I think she's in trouble here. And rightfully so.
 
Wonderful to see you on here Gitana1 !

"Intent" certainly seems to be clearly there in the text messages.

Yesterday the Prosecution made very good points, especially showing that the defendant had contacted Conrad's best friend, Thomas Gammell, the previous year expressing concern about Conrad's mental health and believing that Mr. Gammell would immediately go to Conrad's aid.

However in the months and days leading up to the suicide, Mr. Gammell received no messages at all from the defendant concerning Conrad's mental health, although the defendant was well aware of suicide plans in the making as well as Conrad's mental health despite her knowledge that Mr. Gammell would intervene to save his friend.

I felt this was an extremely strong point made in favor of the Prosecution.
 
Thank you Gitana!
I just really started reading about this case yesterday, and have been listening to the trial as much as I can.
I sway wildly and rapidly between feeling that she has been UNDERcharged (just because her words were so beyond heinous that I want her to pay all the penalties) and thinking 'how can she be charged for anything, based on just being a truly awful human?'
This is such a bizarre case.

The only thing I am certain of, is that Michelle Carter is a despicable 'person'. The amount of time she spent trying to convince poor Conrad to end his life is just beyond the pale.
 
zencompass said:
From what I watched in the trial yesterday, the Prosecution made some very strong points, one being that the writings in the notebook do not appear to be dated. The Judge gave the Defense until today to determine this.

Another strong point the Prosecution made was during the testimony of Conrad's best friend, Thomas Gammell.

Through messages, the Prosection showed that while Michelle Carter sent messages of concern about Conrad's mental health in the year earlier to the best friend, she failed to send messages to the best friend during the crucial months and days of suicide plans of which she was aware.

The Prosecution demonstrated that Michelle Carter was well aware that Conrad's best friend would immediately rush to Conrad's assistance to prevent the suicide yet did not inform him of this. Neither did she inform the best friend of concern about Conrad's mental health during the months and days when she was not only well informed of Conrad's mental health but knew that the best friend was a great support and would indeed help.

My question to our verified attorney on this thread is this: could this be considered as "intent"? Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...

You don't need intent for involuntary manslaughter. You need recklessness. It may help bolster that element- that her conduct in encouraging suicide was reckless.

Think of it this way- is it reckless to hand a two year old a loaded gun? How about putting a paralyzed person in your pool and leaving them there unattended? These can be examples of reckless behavior that lead to a criminal conviction. The question is whether actively encouraging and instructing a person you know to be suicidal, to kill themselves is reckless behavior.

I think that's the crux of the issue.

I vote for conviction.
 
Kadoober said:
Thank you Gitana!
I just really started reading about this case yesterday, and have been listening to the trial as much as I can.
I sway wildly and rapidly between feeling that she has been UNDERcharged (just because her words were so beyond heinous that I want her to pay all the penalties) and thinking 'how can she be charged for anything, based on just being a truly awful human?'
This is such a bizarre case.

The only thing I am certain of, is that Michelle Carter is a despicable 'person'. The amount of time she spent trying to convince poor Conrad to end his life is just beyond the pale.
Click to expand...

I think it's straight forward. If her conduct in acting as a despicable human being constitutes recklessness, she's guilty. It's not either or. The law is fairly clear, IMO.
 
[video=youtube;0LlGQnvaV_k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LlGQnvaV_k[/video]


Michelle Carter Trial DAY 2 PART 3
 
First let me say this woman is indeed a psychopath. Evil and cruel. But this testimony of people who knew Carter sure make it sound like a Munchausen by Proxy kind of thing. She craved attention and she then wanted pity and consolation.

I remember a case that was the cruelest of these that we followed here, was Lacey Spears, who kept overdosing her little son with salt, finally leading to his death when he was already in the hospital with problems caused by her prior uses of giving him huge doses of salt. And finally his mother was tried & found guilty of depraved-indifference murder of a child and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
See http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...tnut-Ridge-23-Jan-2014&highlight=Lacey+Spears

With Carter, she said she has no friends, and I certainly believe it. Poor, poor Michelle. She picks up a couple of casual friends through school & sports, and she finally finds a "boyfriend." She talks of cutting herself, poor, poor Michelle, but her friend sees no evidence of it, etc., etc. The more I hear testimony, the more I see this practice of Munchausen by Proxy. No excuse, this, please know. She is guilty of murder by proxy, IMHO.
 
proctorelites said:
I listened to parts 2 and 3 first, that were posted here. I did not realise they're all out of order and missing parts here. Then went on YouTube found ladyjustice's account and watched part 4 and suddenly realised I had to watch opening statements. My mind was intrigued during opening statements. What she did was absolutely horrific. I am not sure I could find this girl guilty. I wanted her slaughtered until I heard opening statements. But, I don't have all of the evidence either. This is so sad. Yall don't tar and feather me for my opinion!! I'd want her sitting right where she is if it were my son. But, after hearing her defense attorney it changed my initial conviction of her guilt. Interested to see what else they'll present.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I'm glad this case isn't before a jury. I watched the opening. The defense is trying to state that he was fully suicidal, had a plan, intended to do it and would have done it without her actions. But I think a distinction has to be made. First of all, he may have tried in the past but wasn't successful. His hesitation shows he was scared and uncertain. Not committed. Second, the very fact that he WAS suicidal makes her actions reckless. If she had made those statements and arguments to someone who was not suicidal, it would not be reckless behavior, I think, unless the victim was on something.

But the defense does not seem to be concentrating on the reckless aspect. They seem to be concentrating on the causation aspect. Did her conduct cause his death on this occasion? Would he have eventually gone through with successful suicide in the absence of her words to him? Perhaps. But for me, that is irrelevant. Because it was this particular day, this particular death that was important. Did he hesitate on that day? Did he try to delay on that day or on the days before? Did he try to get out of it? Did he waffle? Was he unsure? Did it thus take convincing to get this terribly unstable young man to go through with the plan?

If so, causation seems clear.
 
Thanks everyone for there input to the case, very thoughtful and intelligent post. I have been gone all day and just finished reading your post. I will have to catch up on todays testimony later. I am headed out again to grandkids ball games. Somedays I just don't have enough time to be here like I want.

Keep the good post coming, I love reading everyones thoughts!
 
gitana1 said:
I'm glad this case isn't before a jury. I watched the opening. The defense is trying to state that he was fully suicidal, had a plan, intended to do it and would have done it without her actions. But I think a distinction has to be made. First of all, he may have tried in the past but wasn't successful. His hesitation shows he was scared and uncertain. Not committed. Second, the very fact that he WAS suicidal makes her actions reckless. If she had made those statements and arguments to someone who was not suicidal, it would not be reckless behavior, I think, unless the victim was on something.

But the defense does not seem to be concentrating on the reckless aspect. They seem to be concentrating on the causation aspect. Did her conduct cause his death on this occasion? Would he have eventually gone through with successful suicide in the absence of her words to him? Perhaps. But for me, that is irrelevant. Because it was this particular day, this particular death that was important. Did he hesitate on that day? Did he try to delay on that day or on the days before? Did he try to get out of it? Did he waffle? Was he unsure? Did it thus take convincing to get this terribly unstable young man to go through with the plan?

If so, causation seems clear.
Click to expand...

Yes Gitana. I agree. Not that day, not this crime. Like any other crime opportunity is key. "'All I had to say was I love you and don't do this one more time and he'd still be here"
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/04/its_all_my_fault_unsealed_fili.html

Reckless and self indulgent. If someone is walking down the street carrying money in his hand that's not an excuse to rob him. She didn't cause his mental illness, no, but she exploited it. I don't know how it fits with a Good Samaritan Law and that hasn't been touched on, but she had an obligation and she ignored that. And she knew that as well. "All I had to say..." And all the while lying to people as he was dying. Then exploiting his family. She wasn't done until LE took her phone.

JMO
 
I see the Judge sentencing her to a short prison time....not the max. She knew exactly what she was doing, texts, actions all show that...JMOO

Thanks everyone for the updates, opinions and input.
 
For me, the crux of the guilty/not guilty is when Conrad got out of his truck. Why didn't she say, "Conrad, walk away from the truck and wait for me. I'll find a way to get to you and then we can have a long talk and a few hugs," or something like that. It's as if he had been at the edge of the cliff and then stepped back; she turns him around and pushes him off the cliff. Cruel; selfish, knowing the attention and pity she would get; knowing that she can go to his family & cry with them and be consoled some more. Just plain cruel and selfish. Just plain guilty.
 
Thank you, thank you to you all for your dilligent work here. I have not been around all day so am going to catch up completely as soon as I can.
I am so glad to see that we basically are all agreeing on what a vile girl this is. Come to think of it how can we not?
As I have said in the past I do not think Conrad would have gone forward with suicide. I just don't. She did literally push him off a cliff as far as I am concerened.
Thank the moon above that LE grabbed her cell phone. The text say it all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 156 more.
Total: 2,042 (members: 157, guests: 1,885)

Online statistics

Members online
157
Guests online
1,885
Total visitors
2,042
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,434
Messages
18,095,491
Members
230,860
Latest member
jusslikeme
Back
Top