Discussion in 'Community Board' started by MaryAnnDVC, Jun 5, 2017.
That's a really horrible thing to say.
I don't have a clue what the judge will do, but yes she does need help, even from her own issues. They chose to do a bench trial.So we will never know how jury would have decided. Even thought she is out till sentencing, maybe they will start getting her some counceling sp? to get her through. But we are held accountable for our actions. It really is a no win situation for either side. Most of the time I am on the state side of things. There was one I was on the defense side.
Thank you Mare for starting the thread. Hopefully Pam will go next year. We are all so patient when waiting for them to start. The lady that was having her baby, she had a boy! Born june 9th. I hope , oh boy I forgot her name , her little girl would be what 4 yrs now I think. Yikes!
Hope that helps. There are other ones for murder as well that I had to look up with the look of now wth does that mean...
I was actually shocked by the verdict. I was glad for it, just really thought it was going to go not guilty.
I don't think she will get anywhere near the max. I think the judge can see she is a sick girl who needs mental help and will take that into consideration when he sentences her.
Any amount of time though is going to hard for her to do. I just don't think she will fair well in prison.
I'm very surprised by the verdict. I don't think I agree with the verdict but I hope she gets the help she needs.
I wish her well, and hope she heels from all this. And I hope in time the Conrad's parents can heel as well. I the sentence is 20 yrs, but I don't think the judge has to go by that either, but I could be wrong as well.
Such a ironic and perplexing post considering the nature of the case and how you feel about it.
The verdict is really the best for everyone. Conrad's parents get peace of mind from justice, and hopefully Carter will get the mental attention she desperately needs.
This was a mess all around. I was surprised but not displeased at the verdict.
Regarding her picture (and others I've seen) I couldn't help but wonder if she has that disorder where she pulls out her hair. It seems she has a large, unnaturally place bald spot. Has anyone else noticed that?
No I did not notice it, I don't look for things in people's looks. I wonder if stress could cause hair loss though.
I think she just might have an unfortunate hairline... that disorder isn't usually characterized by pulling hair out in an orderly way (which a bald spot would appear as)
There maybe family's have a genetic hair line to lose hair early in life.
I'm home and watching news reports and I'm glad that it wasn't just me confused about the direction the judge was going for a while. Interesting seeing people's faces, rather than the backs of their heads. The defense attorney looked pretty confused listening to the judge. I think they thought it was looking good for her at first.
I agree with the verdict. I don't think she should get anywhere near 20 years, and I don't believe she will. I also think that letting her stay out on bail was the correct decision. I don't believe for a second she's a danger to anyone else. I hope they keep a close eye on her, because the potential for 20 years in prison could be especially overwhelming for someone with mental health issues anyway.
This is why I was surprised she was still released on bail... not because she's a danger to others, but because she probably could benefit from close monitoring until sentencing.
I was shocked that she wasn't taken into custody right away. But there is always a reason for everything. I hope nothing comes out later on she even thought about encouraging anyone else. I guess August will come soon enough.
But it seems to me that the whole things rests on the idea that she did intend for him to die, rather than texting those things and not believing that he would go through with it. (Because I can definitely see a kid not believing another kid and saying "go ahead and do it, then" - though I don't think that's all that happened here.)
I don't think she should have been convicted of murder, though, either. Making words into crimes is a very dangerous thing to do.
(I think what she did was awful, don't get me wrong! I just don't think it's the same as killing him.)
I agree. And not just in cyber-bullying. I see this turning into a thing where people "who should have seen the signs" and did not (or did, and still could not convince the person to get help) are accused as well. It's really very scary.
That's a huge stretch, people who "should" have seen signs vs relentlessly encouraging someone to kill himself including telling him to get back in the car because he seemed to be backing out.
If she's at risk of harming her herself, then they should get her help outside of incarceration.
Statement by Massachusetts ACLU:
It is a stretch, but who knows what can happen down the line. I would have never thought someone could face up to 20 years because they were convicted of involuntary manslaughter for texting encouragement to an individual who was already suicidal (and suicide not being against the law in MA). I could see if she herself drove him to become that way, but he had made the decision to kill himself before they were even in a relationship. And no way am I defending what she did, I just don't like the door this guilty verdict has opened.
I disagree. As technology grows, so does bullying and harassment, and the law needs to catch up. This may be a pivotal case towards that, or it may be overturned. However, again, it's a HUGE stretch, those two scenarios of "should" knowing someone is suicidal vs RELENTLESSLY encouraging him and telling him to get back in, KNOWING the result would be fatal. Totally unrelated "if/thens." Apples/oranges.
As the judge pointed out, he had attempted suicide before, and backed out each time. He got out of the car, i.e., he was backing out. Evidence showed he got back in because of her, and she knew he would die. And she had time, and the means (911, his mother's and sister's phone numbers), before and during, to get him help. And by her own account, she knew that she could have turned it around.
I don't think this was a clear case of bullying or harassing. You can disagree but no doubt this does open a can of worms, and I'm not talking about cases exactly like this. Its the kinds of things people could now be held criminally liable for like the poster above mentioned. Thats the thing about a can of worms, one never really knows the consequences of opening it until they become a reality.
I don't agree with the judge, IMO he was suicidal and it doesn't matter that he didn't go through with it before. There really is no way to know for a fact whether or not he would have gotten back in the truck. Yes she encouraged him, but he made the final decision, and maybe it was because he really wanted to die.
Of course its a moot point since there was no jury but I know I would have never voted "guilty" in this case.
Separate names with a comma.