Manslaughter by txt.
- Thread starter h4rm0ny
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,636
He didn't bother to even inform anyone... or even say maybe dial emergency services?
I agree with it if that's the case. I mean what kind of sicko does that too.... lets someone fall into water doesn't even tell anyone then just goes clubbing...
But then again he had been on coke, I don't use drugs so can't tell you what it's like on it.
indeed, glad to see her convicted over this
I was going to post this in the freedom of speech thread in SC the other day but forgot about doing so
how about this one, pretty sick if you've not heard of it before:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chappaquiddick_incident
He went on to become a United States Senator and got an honorary Knighthood from the Queen... seemingly for some people (if you're rich and well connected) you can get ****** up, go off in a car with a girl behind your wife's back and leave her for dead in a vehicle accident with no real consequences aside from a suspended sentence because of your 'good character'.
Last edited:
She showed no remorse.
She contacted his mother and sister without telling them that she knew where his dead body was, and why he had died. Nor did she tell them that she had been sending him messages right up to the point when he killed himself, urging him to get back in the car and die.
20 years is too short. The worst of it is, she'll probably get 8 or something pathetic.
She contacted his mother and sister without telling them that she knew where his dead body was, and why he had died. Nor did she tell them that she had been sending him messages right up to the point when he killed himself, urging him to get back in the car and die.
20 years is too short. The worst of it is, she'll probably get 8 or something pathetic.
I thought it was like leaving the scene of an accident with cars.
Ie you csn walk off if you phone the police etc but you couldn't just do nothing
It's America though once she's in prison for whatever sentence she will end up staying at least double
Not like the uk they add years to a sentence without blinking an eye there
Wow that is disgraceful, further evidence of a totalitarian state. Such an absurd precedent could potentially make anyone responsible for anyone else's death. Didn't jump in and risk drowning? Murder? Someone chokes and you didn't perform the heimlich maneuver? Murder. Someone has a heart attack and you didn't perform cpr? Murder. That judge is a wack job. What makes it worse was the fact that he was intoxicated and therefore did not have the capacity to make rational decisions.
Well lets be honest, they went away together and he wont describe/forget how she fell in.
Then undisturbed by her drowning to death, went to a club. Without even attempting to call for help, i think perhaps it fits.
So the courts should run on pure speculation that he pushed her in and try to get him in prison in any way possible? What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
It wont be be that they speculated anything. He made no attempt whatsoever to help her, even calling 999 would stop him being culpable.
He decided she'd die more or less, also leaving the scene is punishable.
It seemed like you were implying he directly pushed her in or something. So what if he made no attempt to help her, he is not her carer and should not be held responsible for her death, the idea that doing nothing should be punishable by prison is repugnant.
Furthermore is someone is incapacitated by intoxication it's even more ludicrous. Should every drunken mishap now result in a criminal charge against the people the victim was hanging out with?
Last edited:
Catalytic converters output carbon dioxide which is a toxic gas. They also do not remove all the carbon monoxide from the exhaust.
I think you're greatly overstating the case for the defence.
This wasn't a case of "telling someone she wants him to die and allowing him to commit suicide". Nor is it something else you mentioned in another post - "Honestly, if for five years someone kept txting me about suicide if they caught me at the wrong moment saying they were trying to commit suicide and then txting me just after that to tell me they weren't, I might well send a reply telling them to get the **** back in the car and get on with it." Those are both single statements made in anger. What she did was a deliberate, calculated, sustained and coldly executed (there's no sign of anger in her texts) campaign to talk him into suicide. At least dozens of texts and some phone calls and who knows what else, sustained over a period of years. She then ordered him to kill himself after he'd started to do so and then backed down, so she did distinguish that occasion from previous ones when he said he was going to kill himself but didn't. Also, on those occasions she hadn't been repeatedly badgering him to go out and buy the kit he'd use to kill himself when she ordered him to kill himself. She knew this time was different because she made it different. In addition to that, she publically portrayed herself as a victim and as attempting to stop him killing himself. It's completely different to how you describe it.
I'm more swayed by the argument given in the opinion piece you linked to, i.e. stepping back and considering the implications for freedom of speech rather than considering this specific case, and also by a legal argument I've read, namely that the charge is wrong. A deliberate, sustained and successful attempt to cause a person's death doesn't fit involuntary manslaughter because that's for when the death isn't intentional and the "manslaughter" part is legally rather dubious too when the weapon is words.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 May 2011
- Posts
- 12,333
- Location
- Woking
She's a disgusting woman. I read the texts and as far as I'm concerned, if she hadn't done anything to interfere he'd still be alive. He had the intent, but many suicidal people don't actually want to die - and they don't. Without her, she'd be one of those people.
I'm glad that they've locked her up. I can't imagine being a defence lawyer trying to argue for that ****.
I'm glad that they've locked her up. I can't imagine being a defence lawyer trying to argue for that ****.
Honestly it feels more like murder than manslaughter.
Manslaughter is defined as..
the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or in circumstances not amounting to murder.
However there was clear malice here. She wanted him to die. She pushed him to killing himself so I'd class it as murder.
Manslaughter is defined as..
the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or in circumstances not amounting to murder.
However there was clear malice here. She wanted him to die. She pushed him to killing himself so I'd class it as murder.
So if someone falls into say, the Thames, everyone should just walk by, uncaring and not calling for help?
This guy clearly knew she was there, dying and he went instead to a club rather than even punch in a few numbers into a phone, this is clearly made worse by the fact that they knew each other at least materially, they both became each others responsibility.
I get why you're being all bothered by this as some attack on his freedom, but seriously, he's a massive knob and deserves punishment.
Of course you shouldn't walk by, that guy is a ****. But I don't think being a **** should be punishable by prison.
If you believe he deserves prison then answer me this.
Where is the supposed threat to society that this guy poses, and what purpose does putting him in prison serve?
If you believe he deserves prison then answer me this.
Where is the supposed threat to society that this guy poses, and what purpose does putting him in prison serve?