That’s not the logical bottom of the slope. The logical bottom of the slope is a limit on the First Amendment where people can’t say anything even remotely less than positive to anyone, ever, lest they be on the hook if the person the negative statement was directed to kills themselves.

No, that’s not how it’s supposed to work. She wasn’t “conspiring to commit a crime”. Telling someone to kill themselves and giving tips isn’t “conspiring to commit a crime).

But that’s straight up not a crime. Being negative, talking about suicide, whatever ... not a crime. I personally think that she might have just snapped after being burdened with a lot of suicide talk. IIRC, didn’t he have past attempts?

So I really don’t think that what she did is illegal, and I’m so sorry that you went through all of that. You know that it wasn’t your fault, right? Teenagers who are not counselors can’t and shouldn’t be on the hook for something like that.

I actually like thicker/darker eyebrows. I personally think hers look fine.

That’s not how it’s supposed to work, though. Using your logic, any bully is now responsible if they say “kill yourself” to someone, and that person agrees and does end their life.

It’s really not a crime, though. You can think things are really terrible, but this is not manslaughter.

Actually no, if the situation was reversed, what would actually happen is people would hem and haw about how this is so going to ruin his life or he doesn’t even eat filet mignon anymore! and call her all kinds of crazy.

Except, you have no legal duty to intervene. She didn’t have to tell the cops where he was, and what he was doing. She could have, but she didn’t have to.

Everyone always forgets the 4 people that Couch murdered. Thank you.

But in that case, he gave her the gun and taught her to use it.

Sure, but in your scenario, you’re undertaking the act of firing a weapon. Words are not weapons.

Because your feelings do not make law. Nor should they.

They actually don’t even say that! Certain medical professionals have an obligation to assist in an emergency, but mostly what Good Samaritan laws do is provide a good defense if the person you try to help files a lawsuit against you.

I absolutely do not think this is correct. I’m an attorney. Are you? Methinks not.

Because there’s no duty to intervene without certain relationships. I could watch someone drown and not offer to assist them, and be legally in the clear.

She had no duty to save his life. There’s no duty to intervene, barring certain relationships. BF/GF isn’t one of them.

Simple. Are you comfortable with the fact that now, whenever someone chooses to end their own life, the person “responsible” is going to be put on trial?

I really don’t think that she committed a crime, especially not involuntary manslaughter. He took his own life.

I’m going to vote C. If they want to fuck me, and all the other women and girls in the district over, I’m taking the whole fucking sinking ship down with me.