I really don't think we want to go about blaming others for someone's suicide. We don't KNOW why anyone chooses to commit that final act. What seems like an obvious trigger may or may not be. He may have gotten bad grades, been dumped by a girlfriend or just had other issues. And, yes, her actions make her an absolutely despicable and horrible person. This case does seem far more cut and dried where she actually said Get Back in the Car as opposed to the Tyler Clementi case where he went and jumped off a bridge after the video, etc. And, then cases can get even fuzzier. Ultimately, your response on how you choose to deal with any given situation in life is solely on you. But, this case is so egregious in with her "aiding and abetting" , that it does seem like there is something criminal.

It's not murder. But she should be a social pariah forever.

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

It's not murder. But she should be a social pariah forever.

---

 She's a psychopath.  

---

 Being a psychopath is not a crime in and of itself.

Well. Charles Manson didn't actually kill anyone either.

What a BITCH.

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

It's not murder. But she should be a social pariah forever.

---

 She's a psychopath.  

---

 Being a psychopath is not a crime in and of itself.

---

Maybe not--but it's only a matter of time before she kills someone.

Again, I think she bears some responsibility here, even if they can't charge her with murder, per se.  

---

 I'm not disagreeing.  But it was always HIS choice.  This is no different that blaming bullies for kids that commit suicide.  She was a huge, nasty bully - but in the end - he chose to take his life.  He didn't have to listen to her.

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

It's not murder. But she should be a social pariah forever.

---

 She's a psychopath.  

---

 Being a psychopath is not a crime in and of itself.

---

Maybe not--but it's only a matter of time before she kills someone.

Again, I think she bears some responsibility here, even if they can't charge her with murder, per se.  

---

 There are actually a lot of psychopaths out in the world and most don't kill anyone. CEO's of big companies tend to be psychopaths. 

He was suspected in 35 + murders but there was not sufficient evidence.

He always arranged for a get away driver. There were 4 he sent out most.

At one point he was in possession of Ms. LaBianca's wallet but how he came to have it is not clear.

Not saying he was never at any of the murders, but the two he was convicted of, he was never placed there by any real evidence. It was based on the accounts of the four he sent.

As for this woman in the OP, she may not have physically been there. But to be in someone's ear, well that's there.

She should be held responsible for encouraging him to kill himself.

Plenty of people "contract" others to kill their spouses and don't actually do the killing themselves. They typically go to jail and often for longer than the person who pulled the trigger. I don't think that being present for the actual killing is neccessary for a conviction. Asking someone to do the killing is enough. So use that standard for this girl.

Murder is a crime. Suicide is not. I think that might be the difference here...

Ohfour wrote:

---

Murder is a crime. Suicide is not. I think that might be the difference here...

---

The only difference I see is that you can't punish the person who commits suicide, they are already dead.  

Ohfour wrote:

---

But even attempted suicide is not a crime. Attempted murder is...

---

But assisted suicide would be--especially if the victim is healthy and not terminally ill.  She assisted.  

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Plenty of people "contract" others to kill their spouses and don't actually do the killing themselves. They typically go to jail and often for longer than the person who pulled the trigger. I don't think that being present for the actual killing is neccessary for a conviction. Asking someone to do the killing is enough. So use that standard for this girl.

---

 Yep.  Google Pamela Smart.  Young school teacher here in NH about 20 years ago, very cute.  Seduced a student and "suggested" they could be together if her husband would go away.  He and some friends killed the husband.  The "killers" were just let out of jail on parole this year, she is still in jail crying that it's unfair.

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

But even attempted suicide is not a crime. Attempted murder is...

---

 Attempted suicide is a crime, its one of the only ways the courts can force someone to be committed and get help even if they don't want it.

---

 Its not here.  Ive only known one person that attempted suicide that was committed. Moat of the time they are hospitilized and then released to their family. 

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

It's not murder. But she should be a social pariah forever.

---

 She's a psychopath.  

---

 Being a psychopath is not a crime in and of itself.

---

Maybe not--but it's only a matter of time before she kills someone.

Again, I think she bears some responsibility here, even if they can't charge her with murder, per se.  

---

 I'm not disagreeing.  But it was always HIS choice.  This is no different that blaming bullies for kids that commit suicide.  She was a huge, nasty bully - but in the end - he chose to take his life.  He didn't have to listen to her.

---

 But neither does anyone who kills someone else when instructed to do so--so then why would the "instructor" ever be held liable under that standard.

 

Also, I'm pretty sure Manson was NOT actually there when the LaBiancas were killed. 

---

 Because conspiring to murder SOMEONE ELSE is not even remotely the same as TAKING ONE'S OWN LIFE.  You have a serious logic fail here.

Telling someone to kill themselves is no different from telling them to kill another.

 

And wasn't it not that long ago we were discussing a bully who told someone to kill them self and people were calling for blood.

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

It's not murder. But she should be a social pariah forever.

---

 She's a psychopath.  

---

 Being a psychopath is not a crime in and of itself.

---

Maybe not--but it's only a matter of time before she kills someone.

Again, I think she bears some responsibility here, even if they can't charge her with murder, per se.  

---

 I'm not disagreeing.  But it was always HIS choice.  This is no different that blaming bullies for kids that commit suicide.  She was a huge, nasty bully - but in the end - he chose to take his life.  He didn't have to listen to her.

---

 But neither does anyone who kills someone else when instructed to do so--so then why would the "instructor" ever be held liable under that standard.

 

Also, I'm pretty sure Manson was NOT actually there when the LaBiancas were killed. 

---

 Because conspiring to murder SOMEONE ELSE is not even remotely the same as TAKING ONE'S OWN LIFE.  You have a serious logic fail here.

---

What's the difference?  A life is a life.  

---

 Because in the case of the Manson murders, the person dying was not the one with the ultimate decision if they should live or die - they were not given any choice in the matter, the decision was made by others.

 

The fact that this is even a question defies all reason.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

Telling someone to kill themselves is no different from telling them to kill another.

 

And wasn't it not that long ago we were discussing a bully who told someone to kill them self and people were calling for blood.

---

 Yeah - it really is. 

 

I could say - "Lily, go kill yourself."  Does that kill you?  No, it does not.  And if you are so weak minded as to listen to me, that is YOUR decision, not mine. 

---

 But it is also the decision of the person who kills someone else at your direction--so why then can you be charged with murder in one case and not the other?

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

Telling someone to kill themselves is no different from telling them to kill another.

 

And wasn't it not that long ago we were discussing a bully who told someone to kill them self and people were calling for blood.

---

 Yeah - it really is. 

 

I could say - "Lily, go kill yourself."  Does that kill you?  No, it does not.  And if you are so weak minded as to listen to me, that is YOUR decision, not mine. 

---

 But it is also the decision of the person who kills someone else at your direction--so why then can you be charged with murder in one case and not the other?

---

Because conspiracy to commit murder is a crime - and the victim has NO say.  Suicide - in this instance - is a sole act and was completely within the control of the deceased.  COMPLETELY. 

Now, assisted suicide could be a crime, but she did not provide him with the means, and she did not take the final action, therefore she did not "assist".  She wasn't even there.

 

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

Telling someone to kill themselves is no different from telling them to kill another.

 

And wasn't it not that long ago we were discussing a bully who told someone to kill them self and people were calling for blood.

---

 Yeah - it really is. 

 

I could say - "Lily, go kill yourself."  Does that kill you?  No, it does not.  And if you are so weak minded as to listen to me, that is YOUR decision, not mine. 

---

 But it is also the decision of the person who kills someone else at your direction--so why then can you be charged with murder in one case and not the other?

---

Because conspiracy to commit murder is a crime - and the victim has NO say.  Suicide - in this instance - is a sole act and was completely within the control of the deceased.  COMPLETELY. 

Now, assisted suicide could be a crime, but she did not provide him with the means, and she did not take the final action, therefore she did not "assist".  She wasn't even there.

 

---

But the perpetrator still has the same decision to make--to kill or not.   

---

 Can you really not see the pivotal difference between taking your own life and taking the life of someone else? 

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

Telling someone to kill themselves is no different from telling them to kill another.

 

And wasn't it not that long ago we were discussing a bully who told someone to kill them self and people were calling for blood.

---

 Yeah - it really is. 

 

I could say - "Lily, go kill yourself."  Does that kill you?  No, it does not.  And if you are so weak minded as to listen to me, that is YOUR decision, not mine. 

---

 But it is also the decision of the person who kills someone else at your direction--so why then can you be charged with murder in one case and not the other?

---

Because conspiracy to commit murder is a crime - and the victim has NO say.  Suicide - in this instance - is a sole act and was completely within the control of the deceased.  COMPLETELY. 

Now, assisted suicide could be a crime, but she did not provide him with the means, and she did not take the final action, therefore she did not "assist".  She wasn't even there.

 

---

But the perpetrator still has the same decision to make--to kill or not.   

---

 Can you really not see the pivotal difference between taking your own life and taking the life of someone else? 

---

 It wasnt her life.  She encouraged another to take a life.  

She looks like a snotty brat and If I was a parent of any of her friends I will greatly discouraged them from any contact with her.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

Telling someone to kill themselves is no different from telling them to kill another.

 

And wasn't it not that long ago we were discussing a bully who told someone to kill them self and people were calling for blood.

---

 Yeah - it really is. 

 

I could say - "Lily, go kill yourself."  Does that kill you?  No, it does not.  And if you are so weak minded as to listen to me, that is YOUR decision, not mine. 

---

 But it is also the decision of the person who kills someone else at your direction--so why then can you be charged with murder in one case and not the other?

---

Because conspiracy to commit murder is a crime - and the victim has NO say.  Suicide - in this instance - is a sole act and was completely within the control of the deceased.  COMPLETELY. 

Now, assisted suicide could be a crime, but she did not provide him with the means, and she did not take the final action, therefore she did not "assist".  She wasn't even there.

 

---

But the perpetrator still has the same decision to make--to kill or not.   

---

 Can you really not see the pivotal difference between taking your own life and taking the life of someone else? 

---

 It wasnt her life.  She encouraged another to take a life.  

---

 It was HIS life and HE took it.  He was always the one in control.  With murder - the victim is not in control. 

Or are you telling me that a 17 year old girl can control an 18 year old man's action with nothing more than a text message or phone call? Being mean is not murder. 

Telling someone to go to hell doesn't send them there.  Telling someone to go fvck themself does not actually lead to one fvcking themself.  Telling someone "go kill yourself" is not murder just because the weak-minded person actually does it.  There is this little word called "no".  Free will and all that.

She broke no law.

---

 LOL!!!  um, yeah.  A 17 year old girl can most certainly control an 18 year old boys actions. 

 

Beyond that, again, using your logic if she told him to kill her mom and he did it--she wouldmnt have any responsibility, either.

 

either she can control his actions or she cant.  If she cant, then she bears no reponsivility in either case.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Bull. That would be Conspiracy to commit murder and that IS a crime. You obviously have no knowledge of the law whatsoever. You have 2 people planning the death of a 3rd.

---

Who cares about the law?  I'm not even arguing the law.