Conrad Roy III's family breaks their silence after Michelle Carter is convicted
- Author: Larry Hoffman Jun 19, 2017,
Jun 19, 2017, 16:05
He also declared that what amounted to a constant and aggressive encouragement (for him to go ahead and take the suicide plunge) during these texts was what "caused the death of Mr. Roy".
Prosecutors also cited text messages Carter sent on the day of Roy's death.
Carter had waived her right to a jury trial, meaning that members of the community did not render the verdict; Moniz acted exclusively as jury. The text messages are protected free speech and prosecutors have overreached by charging her with manslaughter, her attorneys have argued.
Acting on Roy's behalf, prosecutors claimed that Carter was desperate for attention and asserted that Roy's death would provide her with the attention she craved.
While the family will have to wait until August 3 for the sentencing of Carter, who faces up to 20 years in prison, they hope she will receive the maximum punishment. "I mean, you're about to die". "You just keep pushing it off to another night and say you'll do it but you never do". "You need to just do it".
Segal said this conviction stepped outside of the limits of local laws, and violates free speech as laid out in the USA and MA constitutions. "You can't keep living this way", Michelle allegedly said in another message. Carter and Roy met in Florida in 2012 while both were on vacation with their families.
Carter broke down in tears and sobbed into a tissue when Judge Lawrence Moniz read out the verdict at a brief hearing in the court in Taunton, south of Boston in MA.
Carter had urged Roy to "get back in" his truck as it was filling with toxic gas. Through the course of the trial dozens of Facebook and text messages sent by Carter to Roy were made public, most of which revolved around Carter encouraging Roy to commit suicide.
"I see a potential slippery slope here", Gutterman said, noting that the verdict in the Carter trial could potentially open the door to "misuse or over-application of legal standards". The ACLU of MA said the guilty verdict violates the First Amendment.
As a result, the case led to some important legal questions, as indicated by The Washington Post: "Can a person be charged and convicted in someone's death even if she was not with the victim when he died?".
Dr. Peter Breggin, a psychiatrist testifying for the defense, said Carter was a "very troubled youngster" who suffered from depression.
Further to this, they accused Carter of being on the phone to Roy in the moments before his passing.
There is no law in MA making it a crime to encourage someone, or even to persuade someone, to commit suicide.