Death via text message
In daily life, I'm a lawyer and there is a recent case that really captured my attention. I don't practice criminal law, but the psychological aspects associated with such are of real interest and fascination for me. In Massachusetts, a complex legal/societal dilemma recently played out, likely altering the course of criminal jurisprudence in the U.S. It weaves all elements of the modern social world into one web, with the threshold for personal responsibility as the main trigger point for the Court's decision.
The girl pictured here, now aged 20, persuaded her ex-boyfriend in thousands of text messages to commit suicide. Even tormenting him and calling him a pussy for not doing it, when he threatened to on multiple occasions. I guess it could be described, unfortunately, as the ultimate mind fuck game by a female. Eventually, he succumbed at age 18, committing suicide by asphyxiation and lethal fumes in a parked car in his garage. The girl listened over the phone as he took his last breath, and failed to alert authorities at any point for rescue, or even his parents after it was clear he died.
The Massachusetts Judge found that her failure to act, when she was the one who put the boy in the toxic environment in the first place, constituted reckless conduct, punishable by a guilty verdict in the involuntary manslaughter trial. Basically, the ruling held that her conduct caused the suicide, not the boy's own free will. That the thousands of texts she sent, the bullying, the instigation to follow through with suicide...all of it tipped the young man, who had a documented history of mental problems, over the edge.
Many view the verdict as concerning because it reflects a judicial willingness to expand legal liability for another person's suicide, an act which by definition is a completely independent choice. Moreover, when and under what circumstances is the line between mere trolling crossed such that criminal culpability arises?
The case may alter laws in Massachusetts and creates a real twist, holding that someone's words literally killed another...that the murder weapon was not a gun, knife, hands used to strangle, or some other more commonly known method to inflict death on another. In this case, the murder weapon was characters typed and read on a mobile device, and little more.
Everyone complains about the criminal justice system, but as this case demonstrates, everything is not so black and white. The Courts and juries constantly tackle such provocative situations, highlighting all of the most vile elements of human nature. And it is their job to try to make sense of it all, and ensure "justice" (whatever that really means) is served.
Thoughts? Should the girl be punished in some way for her actions? And, if so, what punishment befits this horrid crime?