Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

What's happening in your world? Discuss it here.
Forum rules
Play nice. We will be watching

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby D-LOGAN » Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:32 pm

Marcuse wrote:
I believe in free speech, and I think someone should be free to say "you should kill yourself."


I don't think you should be free to say that, because it's encouraging violence against another person.


Gotta disagree with you on this one chief. I'm of the opinion that the speech that should be restricted when it comes to calling for someone to inflict violence upon themselves should be narrowed down to instances were you have a reasonable expectation that the other person will take heed of your words and do just that.

Like if I'm the leader of a cult and I tell one of my fanatically devoted followers to kill themselves, whom I know will do whatever I tell them, then that should be punishable as a crime. Likewise in this case where the individual in question had clear reason to expect this man to take heed of her words due to his mental state and the position of influence over his actions she held due to their relationship, means I'd also think this'd be a case where the person should be held responsible.

However if I get into an argument with some rando in a pub and tell them to kill themselves or say it in the comment section of some youtuber's video where they had the audacity to say something I disagreed with slightly, then no, I don't think that should be something that should be punished legally as I don't think it's fair to say I'd have a reasonable expectation that these people would obey my commands and off themselves.

To put it simply, I can be against this person being legally punished for saying that person should kill themselves WHILST SIMULTANEOUSLY being all in favour of that person being legally punished for saying this person should kill themselves, based on the context and specifics of the situation.

Life man, she's complicated.
  • 13

Not just yet, I'm still tender from before.
User avatar
D-LOGAN
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 3590
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:08 pm
Location: Éire
Show rep
Title: ALL PRAISE UNTO MIGHTY KEK!

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby Marcuse » Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:12 am

I'm of the opinion that the speech that should be restricted when it comes to calling for someone to inflict violence upon themselves should be narrowed down to instances were you have a reasonable expectation that the other person will take heed of your words and do just that.


Without getting into a semantic discussion about the nature of freedom, I question how free one is to speak if one is expressing speech which may or may not be a crime and it's near impossible to tell when it is and is not. In practical terms, drawing the distinction like that would create such a degree of risk that people would not feel free to speak in any case. In addition, it would be impossible to judge the reasonable expectations of people when they spoke, and would mean anyone could claim they expected anything and we would have a difficult time to prove otherwise.

The simple fact is, commanding a third party to inflict death upon someone else is a crime, regardless of how likely those people are to carry it out. If the only reason we want a different distinction for self harm is that we have an ingrained assumption that people are inclined against self harm, then we should examine that for what it is: an assumption.
  • 8

User avatar
Marcuse
TCS Sithlord
TCS Sithlord
 
Posts: 6589
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 8:00 pm
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby D-LOGAN » Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:42 am

Marcuse wrote:Without getting into a semantic discussion about the nature of freedom, I question how free one is to speak if one is expressing speech which may or may not be a crime

Well I'll answer your question- we're not. We don't have freedom to say whatever we want, there are any number of restrictions imposed on us, as there should be for things like- slander, perjury, conspiring to commit crimes etc. Frankly I've never been a fan of the term 'free speech' as I'd much prefer the phrase 'reasonable speech'. But if we go down that road, where does it end? I mean I live in a 'free country', I'm 'free' right? But I'm not 'free' to do whatever the hell I want, I can't rob a bank or murder someone, and unless one's living under a system of total anarchy no one is truly 'free'. But that's a little too philosophical for me, I think we all get that 'freedom' and 'free speech' come with restrictions.


and it's near impossible to tell when it is and is not. In practical terms, drawing the distinction like that would create such a degree of risk that people would not feel free to speak in any case. In addition, it would be impossible to judge the reasonable expectations of people when they spoke, and would mean anyone could claim they expected anything and we would have a difficult time to prove otherwise.

Yeah, it's impossible to tell 100% percent of the time when someone is and isn't being serious or definitely knew what someone else would do. We'd have to use common sense and have a court of law decide whether or not the person in question had a reasonable expectation over whether someone else would or wouldn't do what they told them. I'm fine with that.

The simple fact is, commanding a third party to inflict death upon someone else is a crime, regardless of how likely those people are to carry it out.

So if you were to command me right now to murder my next door neighbour, that should be regarded as a crime? I just don't think I would regard that as a legitimate call to violence. You have no authority over me and no reason to expect me to comply or take you seriously.

If you had a platform of some kind and were saying you wanted someone to kill your next door neighbour or their next door neighbour then THAT in my opinion would be, as it's reasonable to assume you must know someone following you MIGHT take you seriously and therefore you should be punished for that. But I don't think just a blanket ban regardless of the situation or context should be made, like what if people are just joking and know the other person knows their joking or just trying to make a point and knew the other person knows that?

That's my take anyway.

If the only reason we want a different distinction for self harm is that we have an ingrained assumption that people are inclined against self harm, then we should examine that for what it is: an assumption.

I'm fine with an assumption that most people won't kill themselves if literally anyone tells them to, unless we have reason to assume otherwise. And in my opinion if you wanted to punish someone for doing so, you'd need to prove in a court of law that they did have a reasonable assumption that they other person would follow their commands.

That's fair in my opinion. May not in anyone elses' but it is in mine.
  • 6

Not just yet, I'm still tender from before.
User avatar
D-LOGAN
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 3590
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:08 pm
Location: Éire
Show rep
Title: ALL PRAISE UNTO MIGHTY KEK!

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby Windy » Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:59 pm

The woman had no chance of getting away with it after she told the guy to get back into the car after he chickened out. Manipulating someone who's currently impaired by carbon monoxide poisoning into killing himself isn't really defensible.
  • 15

User avatar
Windy
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri May 29, 2015 11:41 am
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby Absentia » Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:38 pm

Marcuse wrote:The simple fact is, commanding a third party to inflict death upon someone else is a crime, regardless of how likely those people are to carry it out.


I'm not sure about your side of the ocean, but in the US Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) established that speech is protected unless it is likely to produce imminent lawless action, the two operative words being "likely" and "imminent".
  • 8

User avatar
Absentia
TCS Moderator
TCS Moderator
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 4:46 am
Location: Earth
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby Marcuse » Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:49 pm

Absentia wrote:
Marcuse wrote:The simple fact is, commanding a third party to inflict death upon someone else is a crime, regardless of how likely those people are to carry it out.


I'm not sure about your side of the ocean, but in the US Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) established that speech is protected unless it is likely to produce imminent lawless action, the two operative words being "likely" and "imminent".


I wouldn't like to say that I'm totally up on the law, but I know that trolling is illegal in the UK and I strongly suspect that messaging someone telling them to kill themself would come under that if nothing else.
  • 4

User avatar
Marcuse
TCS Sithlord
TCS Sithlord
 
Posts: 6589
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 8:00 pm
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby Windy » Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:50 pm

Is there anything that isn't illegal in the UK?
  • 3

User avatar
Windy
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri May 29, 2015 11:41 am
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby Marcuse » Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:51 pm

Windy wrote:Is there anything that isn't illegal in the UK?


Voting Tory.
  • 15

User avatar
Marcuse
TCS Sithlord
TCS Sithlord
 
Posts: 6589
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 8:00 pm
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby tinyrick » Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:44 am

I think there is a significant difference between telling a random stranger online to kill themselves in a heated argument and a significant other suggesting it over and over again until you do it.

I might be a little biased in this opinion cause I just got into an argument with someone over the internet that went there, but in my defense, .9 repeating does not equal 1. .9 repeating can get ever closer to the value of 1, but it will never be 1! Anyone who can't accept that needs to be strapped to a rocket and flown straight into the sun!
  • 6

YEEEEEEAAAHHHHH!!! Tiny Rick!
User avatar
tinyrick
TCS Regular
TCS Regular
 
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Underground Bunker, USA
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby Grimstone » Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:54 am

tinyrick wrote:.9 repeating does not equal 1. .9 repeating can get ever closer to the value of 1, but it will never be 1!


Image

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999...
  • 9

"The struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man's heart."
User avatar
Grimstone
TCS Guerilla
 
Posts: 2158
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 11:52 am
Show rep
Title: Creature of the Night

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby ErvinS » Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:15 am

Absenteia wrote:Note to self: don't follow links to the Bathmate X20 Wiki articles about math. I can't resist the potholes and I get in way over my head, and when I look up it's two hours later and I have a headache.


I think she just wanted sympathy for having lost a boyfriend. Clearly a whacko.
  • 0

Last edited by ErvinS on Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:48 am, edited 2 times in total.
ErvinS
I'm new, be gentle
I'm new, be gentle
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 1:52 pm
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby Doodle Dee. Snickers » Wed Jun 21, 2017 9:01 am

tinyrick wrote:I might be a little biased in this opinion cause I just got into an argument with someone over the internet that went there, but in my defense, .9 repeating does not equal 1. .9 repeating can get ever closer to the value of 1, but it will never be 1! Anyone who can't accept that needs to be strapped to a rocket and flown straight into the sun!


Image
  • 3

Doodle Dee. Snickers
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 2730
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 8:15 pm
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby CarrieVS » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:16 am

tinyrick wrote:I just got into an argument with someone over the internet that went there, but in my defense, .9 repeating does not equal 1. .9 repeating can get ever closer to the value of 1, but it will never be 1! Anyone who can't accept that needs to be strapped to a rocket and flown straight into the sun!


0.999[any number of nines you can actually write or count to]9 is always a little bit less than 1, but 0.99... isn't an arbitrarily large number of nines, it's an infinite number of nines.

If you have a finite number of nines, the amount you have to add to get to 1 is 0.[one fewer 0 than you have nines]1. That might be a very tiny amount but it's always there.
If you have an infinite number of nines, however many 0s you put before the 1 you always have too much (you'll get something like 1.00000[many more 0's]00999...*). You'd have to have an infinite number of 0's, which means you can't put a 1 after them because there's nowhere for it to go, so the amount you have to add is 0.00..., which is hopefully easier to recognise as being simply 0.

Grim's already linked Wikipedia which has a number of demonstrations of why 0.99... = 1, and some analytic proofs which are more rigorous.

0.99... = 1. This is known. It is mathematically proven, which means' it's impossible for it to be untrue.


*equivalent to 1.000[however many 0's]01
  • 8

The Dungeon Master wrote:Those who don't want to be baptised, make a dexterity saving throw.
User avatar
CarrieVS
TCS Redshirt
TCS Redshirt
 
Posts: 7066
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 7:43 pm
Location: By my wild self in the wet wild woods waving my wild tail
Show rep
Title: Drama Llama

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby Absentia » Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:21 am

Note to self: don't follow links to Wiki articles about math. I can't resist the potholes and I get in way over my head, and when I look up it's two hours later and I have a headache.

Oh, uh, on topic...

Marcuse wrote:I wouldn't like to say that I'm totally up on the law, but I know that trolling is illegal in the UK and I strongly suspect that messaging someone telling them to kill themself would come under that if nothing else.


That looks like a law against online harassment, not mutual contact between people who know each other.
  • 9

User avatar
Absentia
TCS Moderator
TCS Moderator
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 4:46 am
Location: Earth
Show rep

Re: Woman who encouraged boyfriend's suicide found guilty

Postby sunglasses » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:22 pm

I agree that a s.o. Telling someone to kill themselves in detail is different then telling someone kys on a moment of heated thought. Buuuuuut you really shouldn't say that shit. Period. Because you could be the straw that breaks that person.

Having been on the receiving end of my friend's ex-husband telling me on facebook to "go fucking kill yourself, you stupid fucking cunt, who the fuck do you think you are, seriously go fucking die" and having Facebook tell me it didn't violate their community standards, I also recognize that we as a society often seemingly allow worse behavior online then we'd tolerate in real life.
  • 15

TCS Etiquette Guide

Rules and FAQs

Zevran wrote:Magic can kill. Knives can kill. Even small children launched at great speeds can kill.
User avatar
sunglasses
TCS Moderator
TCS Moderator
 
Posts: 11541
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:52 pm
Show rep
Title: The Speaker of Horrors.

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests