TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

girl who 'encouraged boyfriend to commit suicide' wants her police statements thrown out of manslaughter trial

bettingdog000

August 11, 2016
75 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/teenage-girl-who-encouraged-boyfriend-8526125
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title girl who 'encouraged boyfriend to commit suicide' wants her police statements thrown out of manslaughter trial
Author

bettingdog000

Upvotes 75
Comments 64
Date August 11, 2016 2:35 PM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4x8agb/girl_who_encouraged_boyfriend_to_commit_suicide/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/girl-who-encouraged-boyfriend-to-commit-suicide.943902
https://theredarchive.com/post/943902
Top posts by bettingdog000

Supreme Judicial Court to hear case of Michelle Carter, teenager accused of encouraging boyfriend to kill himself

190 upvotes
March 26, 2016
/r/MensRights

15-Year-Old Who Killed Mom, Step-Father ‘Lied About Rape, Partied in Times Square on NYE’

60 upvotes
March 26, 2016
/r/MensRights

NY Teacher Sentenced For Poisoning & Drowning Her Kids Because The Father Cheated On Her!

33 upvotes
June 20, 2016
/r/MensRights

Legislature OKs Bill To Revoke Paternity In Cases Of Rape

29 upvotes
June 4, 2016
/r/MensRights

Judge: No jail time for woman accused of covering up 6-year-old’s rape

18 upvotes
June 16, 2016
/r/MensRights

Johnny Depp to Amber Heard

13 upvotes
June 12, 2016
/r/MensRights

Teacher arrested for having sex with student in cemetery, police say

11 upvotes
July 31, 2016
/r/MensRights

Five sue VA hospital doctor over sex assaults

10 upvotes
May 8, 2016
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points26 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

She's doing everything to avoid responsibility for her actions, yet at some point her lawyer will say, "Can't you see she how much she is tormented by her actions?" And she'll have played the tormented soul with tears ruining her mascara and the judge will agree with them. I'm a very forgiving person, but there needs to be genuine remorse. This woman seems to have none.

[–]Electroverted 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm 100% sure she played the "Cry (Persuade)" card already, but she can always give that another go too!

[+][deleted] 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Electroverted 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Charles Manson completely agrees with you and would like to be pardoned

[–]wicknest 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

he was changing his mind when she demanded he get back in the car and finish the job. that kid was on edge and would listen to anybody and she pretended like she was there for comfort when in reality she did it because she knew shed get the feels and attention at school.

[–]chadwickofwv 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That is one evil bitch.

[–]darude82 -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

AWALT.

[–]Lethn 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She clearly doesn't understand how the court system works, you can't just 'throw' out evidence in a fucking trial because you don't happen to like it, why is she not in jail yet?

[–]hackableyou 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She is trying to argue that the cops did not get the evidence lawfully, and therefore, it should be thrown out. She is trying to pull an O.J. Simpson.

[–]bufedad 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

It sucks, but if the evidence was obtained illegally, it should be thrown out.

[–]speedisavirus 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

Nothing at all in that article makes it sound illegally obtained

[–]RunawayGrain 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

Nothing at all in that article makes it sound illegally obtained

They asked the teenager for her phone and laptop passwords without a warrant, while she was not under arrest, and without properly advising her of her right to a lawyer.

Detective Scott Gordon wrote in the arrest warrant that he advised Carter that she was not in custody and was free to leave at any time.

Gordon added he told Carter he had a search warrant for her phone before asking for her phone password.

From the sound of it she is trying to push the 'naive young girl' being bullied by the cops narrative here in a pretty thinly veiled attempt to get out of trouble. Her lawyer is probably just going along with it all as billable time.

Edit: Also, she was banned from social media but it looks like mom is helping her circumvent the ban. It just hit me as demonstrating the mentality of 'whatever we can get away with' that she seems to display throughout:

After her arrest, Carter, a senior at King Philip Regional High School, was banned from social media by a judge but her mother has been updating her page with images, Roy's aunt said.

'With her mother posting things to social media for her, it doesn't feel like a ban,' Maki told the Herald. 'It just doesn't feel like she's grieving - and that's really confusing for us.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3102466/Teen-faces-20-years-bars-encouraging-friend-kill-goes-Disney-World-prom-ahead-manslaughter-trial.html

[–]Phrodo_00 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

She agreed to the searches though, you have the right to not incriminate yourself and personal privacy but she gave that out willingly, so (without knowing the actual laws regarding this) I don't see how it would be illegally obtained evidence.

[–]Electroverted 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Cop asks to search my car, but I'm not under arrest.

I give permission.

Cop finds something bad in my car.

I say backsies!

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Most people don't know the most basic rights. Most police will manipulate people who don't know their rights to obtain as much information as legally possible.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Police don't have to tell you your rights. Miranda is not something they have to quote. Thats from tv and its incorrect. I think its intentionally done.

[–]Vandechoz 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The person in custody must, prior to interrogation, be clearly informed that he has the right to remain silent, and that anything he says will be used against him in court; he must be clearly informed that he has the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer with him during interrogation, and that, if he is indigent, a lawyer will be appointed to represent him.

-- Chief Justice Earl Warren giving the majority opinion, Miranda v. Arizona

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

prior to interrogation, not prior to arrest, or even prior to "hey can I just ask you a few questions? No pressure".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

This video will even tell you this.

[–]Vandechoz 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I know, but you made a more general statement.

[–]bufedad 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

Nothing at all in that article makes it sound illegally obtained

A minor being interrogated without their parents violates their rights. The parents are the executors of the minors rights. The minor cannot choose to waive their right to council, because the parents are in charge of their rights and have to make that decision.

[–]speedisavirus 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Ah, missed the then 17 part. Hope she doesn't get away with it.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Me too.

[–]9279 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Yeah but youre suposed to know your rights. If you agree then you agree.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Yeah but youre suposed to know your rights. If you agree then you agree.

A minor cannot agree to waive their rights. It's not their decision.

[–]9279 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

If a cop asks for something and you give it to them willingly youre a moron.

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

If a cop asks for something and you give it to them willingly youre a moron.

If you talk to a cop, you are a moron. Yes. However, minors cannot waive their right to an attorney. Only their parents can.

[–]9279 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Thats a different thing....

[–]bufedad 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That's the thing that might get the evidence thrown out.

[–]9279 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's a moot point..

[–]libbylibertarian 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The school probably assumed the role of in loco parentis, like it does any other time a kid is questioned at school without their parents.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

like it does any other time a kid is questioned at school without their parents.

The school cannot. The school can administer rights that directly affect the school (privacy, etc...). It cannot administer unrelated rights.

[–]libbylibertarian 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The school cannot. The school can administer rights that directly affect the school (privacy, etc...). It cannot administer unrelated rights.

Once they arrest her they cannot question her without parents around....but she was not under arrest. In that regard cops are free to ask for cooperation and if the suspect provides it, oh well.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Once they arrest her they cannot question her without parents around....but she was not under arrest. In that regard cops are free to ask for cooperation and if the suspect provides it, oh well.

Of an adult, yes. Of a minor, no.

[–]libbylibertarian 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Of an adult, yes. Of a minor, no.

Think of it this way. 17 yr olds can drive without their parents. A cop pulls them over....are you telling me a cop is not allowed to question that motorist without their parents present?

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Think of it this way. 17 yr olds can drive without their parents. A cop pulls them over....are you telling me a cop is not allowed to question that motorist without their parents present?

For a ticket? Absolutely. It's a moving violation and not a crime.

For a crime? No, they aren't allowed to do that without a parent present, and any information they get will be inadmissible in court.

[–]libbylibertarian 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

For a ticket? Absolutely. It's a moving violation and not a crime.

Doesn't matter what it's for. The cop is allowed to question the 17 yr old without parents present, is the point. it could be a traffic citation, a dui stop, or a manslaughter investigation.

Also, until you are charged with a crime, it is up to you whether you cooperate. Sorry, but the evidence won't get tossed. Her lawyers are going through the motions but they know a judge is going to allow it.

[–]mwobuddy -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Downvoted cause right. Lol.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you say something good in a statement, that could help you in court, that's hearsay. If you say something bad, that's evidence.

I agree with her that its an awful double standard. Its unfair to truly innocent people.

In her case, she's clearly a cruel person damaging or ending someone's life with her words.

[–]libbylibertarian 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

According to the article:

But according to the arrest warrant, police had search warrants when they approached her at school.

Detective Scott Gordon wrote in the arrest warrant that he advised Carter that she was not in custody and was free to leave at any time.

Gordon added he told Carter he had a search warrant for her phone before asking for her phone password.

If the warrant isn't a mess, you cannot suppress the evidence.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

If the warrant isn't a mess, you cannot suppress the evidence.

You can suppress anything they got from using her password, unfortunately.

They do not have the right to question her (or any minor) without parents present.

[–]libbylibertarian 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You can suppress anything they got from using her password, unfortunately.

They do not have the right to question her (or any minor) without parents present.

Once they arrest her they cannot question her without parents around....but she was not under arrest. In that regard cops are free to ask for cooperation and if the suspect provides it, oh well.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Duplicate comment, wrong for the same reason.

[–]libbylibertarian 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Think of it this way. 17 yr olds can drive without their parents. A cop pulls them over....are you telling me a cop is not allowed to question that motorist without their parents present? I don't feel like digging up a citation yet so let's just go with this thought exercise for now.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Right. Using a loophole in the system to get evidence in a way that would otherwise be illegal. That's why there's an issue. If the loophole didn't exist she couldn't argue this.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What does this have to do with men specifically?

And this seems pretty critical to me:

They asked the teenager for her phone and laptop passwords without a warrant, while she was not under arrest, and without properly advising her of her right to a lawyer.

If you read the texts, she seems like a complete sociopath. It wouldn't be too surprising to me if she went on find ways to kill other people. However, this might not be the whole story.

I think your parents know you're in a really bad place. I'm not saying they want you to do it but I honestly feel like they can accept it. They know there is nothing they can do. They've tried helping. Everyone's tried, but there is a point that comes where there isn't anything anyone can do to save you, not even yourself. And you've hit that point and I think your parents know you've hit that point. You said your mom saw a suicide thing on your computer and she didn't say anything. I think she knows it's on your mind and she's prepared for it. Everyone will be sad for a while but they will get over it and move on. They won't be in depression. I won't let that happen.

These things actually happen and I've been on both sides of it. I have had identical conversations. It's a long story but I have had agreements with family members about killing myself and about them committing suicide with multiple attempts for each of us (to the point where my mom told me to slash my wrists in a bathtub for easy clean up). It's rare but possible to try a variety of things to help with depression only to find yourself waking up and wishing for a gun to blow your brains out with. That's a feeling that can severely effect people around you. Judging from the sms messages this guy doesn't exactly seem like a case of it, but it really is possible to suck everyone around you into a black hole of depression/addiction where things would really be better off if you died.

[–]Electroverted 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, that's not how it works, and she's not the first to try. "Anything you say or do can be used against you in a court of law." But good luck!

[+][deleted] 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

If she apologized for being mean then I think it should be fine. Its not like she was in control of the knife. If you want to believe that a person can be manipulated into killing themselves by someone else being rude to them, then you're willing to believe that people have no free will.

[+][deleted] 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

So how do you gauge someone being mentally vulnerable? Maybe what you're vulnerable to is not what someone else is vulnerable to and vice versa.

My point is that if you're going to blame others for actions individuals take, where does it stop? What if you're treated harshly by others when you chose to associate yourself with them and become suicidal over their treatment? What if they think they're in the right? Are you the real victim because you got upset over what they did when you chose to associate with them?

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Do you want me to prove words have impact on people ?

Yes, because if you can prove that people are capable of being emotionally damaged or even suicidal due to people's words, then you've struck a great blow against free will and free speech.

People are responsible for their own actions! Its the basis of our laws!

But then people can get in trouble for inciting people to riot or commit crimes, because people can't control themselves!

People are capable of controlling themselves, and a guy who rapes doesn't get to excuse his behavior because of what she was wearing!

But if you tell him to kill himself, you're in trouble for his behavior because he can't control himself!

I don't know what to call the contradictory logic of law. Its classic 1984 double-think. You scare me by actually being able to integrate this and then make your fallacious arguments in full self-confidence.

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Excellent logical rebuttal. I admit defeat. Your argument is too good. It incisively cut apart my arguments with reason and evidence.

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You said people can be responsible for pushing others into committing a crime or an act of self-destruction. And now you're saying they aren't because a woman wearing a sheer dress isn't a mitigating factor in a guy raping her? Who's side are you on?

[+][deleted] 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So you don't have an argument.

[–]Regnes 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's sickening that her lawyer is actually going to roll with "he was going to kill himself anyway" as a defense. I know people joke about lawyers having no morals, but really now.

[+]Saintmyname -9 points-8 points-7 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I don't think this bitch should even be on trial. She encouraged his suicide but if found guilty will only strengthen the foundation of the idea that people aren't responsible for their own actions. If she is found guilty, women will start claiming all kinds of victim status at the hands of male suggestion.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"START". Dude where have you been. It's been going on for a long time now. There are 1000s of example of a woman who does unspeakable things and says "My [insert nearest male] made me do it".

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't think this bitch should even be on trial.

Slippery slope. Everyone deserves a trial. Regardless of how shitty of a human being they are.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

you arent getting what he's saying. Hes saying they shouldn't be on trial because being rude or cruel to someone shouldn't be grounds for being liable because the action taken still lies with that individual. Its like if someone was inciting a riot and then was not liable because the individuals chose to riot.

And yes, a lot of that law doesn't make sense. However, its interesting that people can goad others into committing an act and then not be liable. Like if you keep insulting some guy because you want him to get mad enough to punch you, then you get him for assault. Apparently that's legal and doesn't have repercussions on you for trying to piss someone off

[–]Meistermalkav 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is the usual "Waaah, lets stop applying laws to females, you guys. or else we will be in shit"

No. have one standart for all.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter