Yeah, she is a sh*t and dirty liar. after his death, she even raised money for his family. She is wack-o-loon. But its a uphill battle to convict her of manslaughter and give her 20 years. I can't decide if she is just a selfish teen b*tch, or devious.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Yeah, she is a sh*t and dirty liar. after his death, she even raised money for his family. She is wack-o-loon. But its a uphill battle to convict her of manslaughter and give her 20 years. I can't decide if she is just a selfish teen b*tch, or devious.

---

 Yes, it is.  She wasn't there, she held no gun to his head, and he actually did it to himself.  Hopefully, this will brand her as a pariah forever, but doubtful - people overlook the worst crap.

---

 Massachusetts is so hyper sensitive to cyber bullying since the suicide of that South Hadley girl a few years back, Phoebe Prince.  I think they view this case as the same motivation and want to make an example of her and make her life hell, as they should IMHO.

I saw this on the local news last night. She's twisted. God bless his soul.

flan327 wrote:

---

Blankie wrote:

---

I saw this on the local news last night. She's twisted. God bless his soul.

---

 How did this come to light? The texts?

flan

---

I guess. He killed himself last summer. Then she did fundraising in his honor. I guess it has taken investigators this long to build a case.

If it was her phone, she was awfully stupid to save those texts. If it was his phone, good for whoever for saving the evidence.

What a nasty little bitch!

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Blankie wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Blankie wrote:

---

I saw this on the local news last night. She's twisted. God bless his soul.

---

 How did this come to light? The texts?

flan

---

I guess. He killed himself last summer. Then she did fundraising in his honor. I guess it has taken investigators this long to build a case.

If it was her phone, she was awfully stupid to save those texts. If it was his phone, good for whoever for saving the evidence.

---

 Even if you erase the texts on your device, the police can still get the texts. They don't ever need to see your device. 

---

 And that is what happened.  

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

The fact that he was texting her and he even exited his car and she told him "Get back in" is very chilling. What a terrible thing to do. But, I would like to actually see and read the texts for myself. I agree, she didn't make him commit suicide. He ultimately choose to get back in the car. But, is there some culpability to encourage or assist a person because if that is what she happened, she clearly encouraged him step by step to continue.

---

 hmmmm, I have to wonder, is suicide a crime in this state?  If so, perhaps they could get her on a conspiracy charge.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

What about involuntary manslaughter or something like that?

---

 I do not see how that could stand.  He actually did it.  I mean, think about it.  If you were mad and in a fight with someone and you told them you wished they would die and to go kill themselves, and they did, you are not guilty of crime.  This is just an extreme of that.  Is she evil?  Yes.  But she didn't kill him.

However, saying, I hope you die versus telling someone GET BACK IN THE CAR who is actively trying to kill themselves, does that rise to another level? I think it's a valid question.

Well suicide is illegal in Mass plus they have the law about bystanders to a crime are supposed to help. Any Seinfeld fan would know this from the finale! I think they can at least get her on knowing what he was doing and not reporting to authorities.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

However, saying, I hope you die versus telling someone GET BACK IN THE CAR who is actively trying to kill themselves, does that rise to another level? I think it's a valid question.

---

Of course it's a valid question. We don't know how long they had been friends or why he wanted to kill himself. He reached out to her & now he's dead.

flan 

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

However, saying, I hope you die versus telling someone GET BACK IN THE CAR who is actively trying to kill themselves, does that rise to another level? I think it's a valid question.

---

 Not if she has no power over him - I mean, like holding a gun on him or something.  He didn't have to listen to her.

---

 Yes that is true.  But is there any responsibility for egging on an emotionally disturbed person?

---

If NOT, there should be.

flan 

What about the woman who was just given the death penalty for asking someone else to kill her husband? To me, this is no different. In both cases, the female did not have a weapon, nor did they do any physical harm to the deceased. I understand it was in a different state, but the woman was put to death for asking someone to kill her husband. Certainly telling someone to kill themselves should be held to a similar standard.

flan327 wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

However, saying, I hope you die versus telling someone GET BACK IN THE CAR who is actively trying to kill themselves, does that rise to another level? I think it's a valid question.

---

 Not if she has no power over him - I mean, like holding a gun on him or something.  He didn't have to listen to her.

---

 Yes that is true.  But is there any responsibility for egging on an emotionally disturbed person?

---

If NOT, there should be.

flan 

---

 That would really be way too difficult to judge.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

What about the woman who was just given the death penalty for asking someone else to kill her husband? To me, this is no different. In both cases, the female did not have a weapon, nor did they do any physical harm to the deceased. I understand it was in a different state, but the woman was put to death for asking someone to kill her husband. Certainly telling someone to kill themselves should be held to a similar standard.

---

It is different.  Yes, she's a horrible person, but the guy could have turned off his phone, not listened to her and not killed himself - he was ALWAYS the ultimate decision maker.  Two people conspiring to kill an unwitting victim is not the same at all.

---

 Well the co conspirator could have decided not to kill the victim, could have turned back that night, could have turned the woman in, could have laughed at her and "I am not doing that!" could have done a thousand things other than not kill the victim. Both women are responsible for using their words to bring about the death of another person. 

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

What about the woman who was just given the death penalty for asking someone else to kill her husband? To me, this is no different. In both cases, the female did not have a weapon, nor did they do any physical harm to the deceased. I understand it was in a different state, but the woman was put to death for asking someone to kill her husband. Certainly telling someone to kill themselves should be held to a similar standard.

---

It is different.  Yes, she's a horrible person, but the guy could have turned off his phone, not listened to her and not killed himself - he was ALWAYS the ultimate decision maker.  Two people conspiring to kill an unwitting victim is not the same at all.

---

 Well the co conspirator could have decided not to kill the victim, could have turned back that night, could have turned the woman in, could have laughed at her and "I am not doing that!" could have done a thousand things other than not kill the victim. Both women are responsible for using their words to bring about the death of another person. 

---

 One is done without the knowledge and consent of the victim.  The VICTIM making the ultimate choice makes a very, very HUGE difference.

This girl is a horribly twisted person. Evil.

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

What about the woman who was just given the death penalty for asking someone else to kill her husband? To me, this is no different. In both cases, the female did not have a weapon, nor did they do any physical harm to the deceased. I understand it was in a different state, but the woman was put to death for asking someone to kill her husband. Certainly telling someone to kill themselves should be held to a similar standard.

---

It is different.  Yes, she's a horrible person, but the guy could have turned off his phone, not listened to her and not killed himself - he was ALWAYS the ultimate decision maker.  Two people conspiring to kill an unwitting victim is not the same at all.

---

 Well the co conspirator could have decided not to kill the victim, could have turned back that night, could have turned the woman in, could have laughed at her and "I am not doing that!" could have done a thousand things other than not kill the victim. Both women are responsible for using their words to bring about the death of another person. 

---

 One is done without the knowledge and consent of the victim.  The VICTIM making the ultimate choice makes a very, very HUGE difference.

---

 But in the case of suicide, the victim is in a fragile, impressionable state of mind - isn't thinking clearly and can easily be taken advantage of. That he cried out for help and she did the exact opposite of help makes her at fault. She took someone who could not make a ratonal decision on his own (in the throes of a mental illness) and abused him. She should bear responsibility for his death. She used her words to kill him. 

---

 You act like she was his shrink.  Yes, she is horrible - BUT, he still CHOSE to do what he did.  Peer pressure is not an excuse for your own actions.  He bears the ultimate responsibility for what he did.  He did not have to speak to her, he did not have to listen to her.  Personal responsiblity still matters. 

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

What about the woman who was just given the death penalty for asking someone else to kill her husband? To me, this is no different. In both cases, the female did not have a weapon, nor did they do any physical harm to the deceased. I understand it was in a different state, but the woman was put to death for asking someone to kill her husband. Certainly telling someone to kill themselves should be held to a similar standard.

---

It is different.  Yes, she's a horrible person, but the guy could have turned off his phone, not listened to her and not killed himself - he was ALWAYS the ultimate decision maker.  Two people conspiring to kill an unwitting victim is not the same at all.

---

 Well the co conspirator could have decided not to kill the victim, could have turned back that night, could have turned the woman in, could have laughed at her and "I am not doing that!" could have done a thousand things other than not kill the victim. Both women are responsible for using their words to bring about the death of another person. 

---

 One is done without the knowledge and consent of the victim.  The VICTIM making the ultimate choice makes a very, very HUGE difference.

---

 But in the case of suicide, the victim is in a fragile, impressionable state of mind - isn't thinking clearly and can easily be taken advantage of. That he cried out for help and she did the exact opposite of help makes her at fault. She took someone who could not make a ratonal decision on his own (in the throes of a mental illness) and abused him. She should bear responsibility for his death. She used her words to kill him. 

---

 You act like she was his shrink.  Yes, she is horrible - BUT, he still CHOSE to do what he did.  Peer pressure is not an excuse for your own actions.  He bears the ultimate responsibility for what he did.  He did not have to speak to her, he did not have to listen to her.  Personal responsiblity still matters. 

---

 I agree that personal responsibility matters. But he sought help from her and she used his vulnerability against him.  No, she wasn't his shrink, but she was someone that he turned to for help. she was a witness, not physically, but on the phone via text, she was bearing witness to what he was doing. She didn't even call the police or EMS. There are laws stating that if you witness a crime and do nothing, you are at fault. She facilitated a crime, encouraged it, egged it on...surely that is a crime as well? 

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lets say I am hanging from a cliff by my fingertips. I am yelling for help. Along comes the girl in the OP. I ask her for help. Instead of helping, she stomps on my fingers and walks away. Finally, in pain, I have to let go, my fingers cannot hold on anymore - her stomping on them significantly reduced the amount of time I could hang on - so I let go. Is she at fault for stomping on my fingers and walking away instead of helping me? She hastened my death, she brought about the conditions under which I had to let go. Ultimately it was my decision to let go but she brought about that end much faster AND didn't help me or call anyone over to help me.

---

 You need to remove the stomping of fingers for this to be comparable - she did not do anything physical to this boy to alter his physical ability to keep himself alive.  To be similar, she'd have to come upon the cliff, see you hanging there and tell you to let go and let yourself fall to your death.  Then, if you listen to her, whose fault is that? 

The woman who is getting the death penalty didn't kill her husband. She wasn't even around when he died. All she did was tell her lover she wanted him dead, and she went out dancing. She got the death penalty for setting his car on fire later after he was dead. In my opinion, she is no more culpable than the girl in the OP. The girl in the OP actually talked to the victim and encouraged him to commit the crime. By not calling for help, she committed a crime - the Good Samaritan law compels her to get help, which she did not. She did the opposite.

And in fact, the law to report does not apply in this instance. It does not apply to suicides, and the person must be on scene.

Good Samaritan Laws
There are several laws in Massachusetts insulating those rendering aid from liability, but no law requiring a bystander to provide assistance. Separate statutes free EMS personnel, physicians and nurses, and the general public trained in CPR from personal liability. Many sources suggest that Massachusetts has a “duty to aid” law, which requires witnesses to come to the assistance of crime victims. In fact, this law creates a duty to report, but not a duty to aid. Chapter 268, section 40 provides “Whoever knows that another person is a victim of aggravated rape, rape, murder, manslaughter or armed robbery and is at the scene of said crime shall, to the extent that said person can do so without danger or peril to himself or others, report said crime to an appropriate law enforcement official as soon as reasonably practicable.”

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

What about the woman who was just given the death penalty for asking someone else to kill her husband? To me, this is no different. In both cases, the female did not have a weapon, nor did they do any physical harm to the deceased. I understand it was in a different state, but the woman was put to death for asking someone to kill her husband. Certainly telling someone to kill themselves should be held to a similar standard.

---

It is different.  Yes, she's a horrible person, but the guy could have turned off his phone, not listened to her and not killed himself - he was ALWAYS the ultimate decision maker.  Two people conspiring to kill an unwitting victim is not the same at all.

---

 Well the co conspirator could have decided not to kill the victim, could have turned back that night, could have turned the woman in, could have laughed at her and "I am not doing that!" could have done a thousand things other than not kill the victim. Both women are responsible for using their words to bring about the death of another person. 

---

 One is done without the knowledge and consent of the victim.  The VICTIM making the ultimate choice makes a very, very HUGE difference.

---

 But in the case of suicide, the victim is in a fragile, impressionable state of mind - isn't thinking clearly and can easily be taken advantage of. That he cried out for help and she did the exact opposite of help makes her at fault. She took someone who could not make a ratonal decision on his own (in the throes of a mental illness) and abused him. She should bear responsibility for his death. She used her words to kill him. 

---

 I so agree

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Apparently, he was planning this for months. If he was this depressed and suicidal, what the heck were the parents doing?

---

 Ignoring it, hoped it would go away and that it was just a teen state of mind that he would out grow.  I bet they wish they had been more attentive.