Connect with us

U.S.

Michelle Carter, Who Encouraged Her Boyfriend to Commit Suicide, Files Appeal With Supreme Court

Published

on

  • Michelle Carter, the Massachusets woman who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter for encouraging her boyfriend to kill himself in text messages and phone calls, has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court.
  • Her legal team argues that her conviction violated her constitutional rights to free speech and due process. 
  • According to the filing, Massachusetts is the only state to have upheld the conviction of a “physically absent defendant who encouraged another person to commit suicide with words alone.”

Supreme Court Appeal Filed 

Lawyers for Michelle Carter, the Massachusetts woman who was convicted last year for encouraging her boyfriend to kill himself in text messages and phone calls, are asking the United States Supreme Court to review her case.

The 22-year-old’s legal team filed a petition on Monday, asking the Court to consider, “the questions whether Carter’s conviction for involuntary manslaughter violated the U.S. Constitution.”

In the filing, Carter’s attorneys claim her conviction did so by violating her First Amendment right to freedom of speech and Fifth Amendment right to due process. 

The Death of Conrad Roy III 

In 2014, 18-year-old Conrad Roy III poisoned himself with carbon monoxide in a Kmart parking lot in Fairhaven, Massachusetts. After his death, investigators discovered that he had exchanged several text messages and phone calls with Carter, his then 17-year-old girlfriend, as he contemplated and attempted suicide. 

Messages showed that Carter encouraging him to do it. “I thought you wanted to do this. The time is right and you’re ready, you just need to do it! You can’t keep living this way,” one of several text messages to Roy read.

Carter even suggested ways for Roy to commit suicide. “Drink bleach. Why don’t you just drink bleach?” she asked in other messages found by investigators. “Hang yourself. Jump over a building, stab yourself, idk. There’s a lot of ways.”

According to prosecutors, Roy stepped out of his car as it filled with toxic fumes when he had second thoughts about what he was doing. Then Carter instructed him to return to the car.

In 2017, Carter was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for her part in Roy’s death. Judge Lawrence Moniz of Bristol County said Carter’s “virtual presence” made her responsible for his death and she was sentenced to 15 months in prison.

Her attorneys appealed the decision, but the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld her conviction in February. The court said it, “rejected the defendant’s claim that her words to the victim, without any physical act on her part and even without her physical presence at the scene, could not constitute wanton or reckless conduct sufficient to support a charge of manslaughter.”

Carter was then required to begin serving her sentence following the verdict.

Free Speech & Due Process Arguments 

“Michelle Carter did not cause Conrad Roy’s tragic death and should not be held criminally responsible for his suicide,” said attorney Daniel Marx of Fick & Marx LLP.

“This petition focuses on just two of the many flaws in the case against her that raise important federal constitutional issues for the U.S. Supreme Court to decide.”

In their filing to the Supreme Court, Carter’s legal team says her conviction was “based on words alone” and violated her First Amendment right to free speech. They argue that Carter’s communications with Roy, “did not constitute speech that was ‘an integral part of conduct in violation of a valid criminal statute.’” 

The team goes on to say that her case shows an “urgent need” for the Supreme Court to clarify “that narrow category of unprotected speech.”

Along with this, Carter’s lawyers also claim that the conviction was an arbitrary enforcement of assisted suicide laws that violated her right to due process. “As applied to assist or encouraging suicide with words alone, the common law on involuntary manslaughter violates due process because neither Carter nor any prior precedent has established meaningful guidance to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.”

According to the filing, Massachusetts is the only state to have upheld the conviction of a “physically absent defendant who encouraged another person to commit suicide with words alone.”

“Before this case, no state had interpreted its common law or enacted an assisted suicide statute to criminalize such “pure speech,” and no other defendant had been convicted for encouraging another person to take his own life where the defendant neither provided the actual means of death nor physically participated in the suicide,” the filing states. 

Monday was the last day for Carter to file an appeal to the Supreme Court, but it is unclear if the Court will take the case.

HBO Documentary

The filing came the day before an HBO documentary on Carter titled “I Love You, Now Die: The Commonwealth v. Michelle Carter.” The documentary, which first premiered at this year’s South by Southwest Festival, will air in two installments on Tuesday and Wednesday. 

If you or someone you know may be contemplating suicide, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255. Other international suicide helplines can be found at befrienders.org. You can also text TALK to 741741 for free, anonymous 24/7 crisis support in the US from the Crisis Text Line.

See what others are saying: (Fox News) (The Boston Globe) (The Washington Post)

U.S.

Juror Accuses Kentucky AG of Misrepresenting Deliberations in Breonna Taylor Case

Published

on

  • On Monday, an anonymous grand juror on the Breonna Taylor case filed a complaint alleging that Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron misrepresented the jury’s deliberations and failed to offer them the option to bring homicide charges against the officers.
  • Last week, Cameron announced to the public that the grand jury had not filed any charges against the officers for Taylor’s death. Instead, the jury only brought charges against one officer for firing his weapon recklessly, sending shots into a neighboring apartment.
  • In his announcement, Cameron repeatedly said that while he knew people would be upset with the decision, it was simply his job to present all the facts to the grand jury and let them decide. 
  • However, the complaint accused Cameron of using the jury “as a shield to deflect accountability and responsibility.” It requested that the jury recordings be released and that the jurors be permitted to discuss the case publicly.
  • Also on Monday, a judge ordered the recordings to be released, and Cameron said he would honor the request.

Grand Juror Files Complaint

A grand juror in the Breonna Taylor case filed a complaint in court Monday claiming that Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron misrepresented the jury’s discussions and never offered them the option to bring homicide charges against the officers who shot Taylor in her apartment.

The complaint, which was filed anonymously, also requests that all recordings and transcripts from the jury deliberations be released and that the jurors on the case be permitted to speak about it publicly.

The filing comes just a week after Cameron announced that none of the three Louisville Metro Police officers involved in Taylor’s death were charged for the actual killing of the 26-year-old EMT in what has largely been described as a botched drug raid.

Louisville police were serving a warrant because they believed an ex-boyfriend of Taylor’s was using her apartment to receive packages. Both Taylor and her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, did not have any prior drug arrests or convictions, and no drugs were found in the apartment.

Police say they knocked and identified themselves before entering, but Walker claimed they did not. As a result, he said he thought they were an intruder, and when they entered by force, he fired a weapon, hitting one of the officers in the leg and prompting them to unload more than two dozen rounds into the apartment. 

One of the officers, Detective Brett Hankison, blindly fired shots into the apartment which also traveled into neighboring apartments. Last week, the grand jury charged him with three counts of wanton endangerment, though not in connection with the death Taylor, but because of the shots he fired into the neighboring apartment. 

The two other officers present, Jonathan Mattingly and Myles Cosgrove, do not face any charges.

Following Cameron’s announcement of the grand jury’s findings, Taylor’s family, their lawyers, and many others said they did not believe the attorney general advocated on behalf of the young woman. Many have also called for more information regarding how Cameron presented the case to the jury.

However, Cameron refused to release any grand jury transcripts or recordings, arguing that it could interfere with other ongoing investigations. 

Complaint Allegations vs. Cameron’s Public Statements

The grand juror complaint filed Monday also echoed those calls for transparency concerning the information presented to the jury, and accused Cameron of using the jury “as a shield to deflect accountability and responsibility.”

In his remarks to the public, Cameron said that he knew many people would be unhappy with the decision but repeatedly emphasized that his role was to pursue the truth, present all the facts to the grand jury, and let them decide.

Regarding those facts, he said there were six possible homicide charges that could have been filed, but added that those charges “are not applicable to the facts before us because our investigation showed — and the grand jury agreed — that Mattingly and Cosgrove were justified in the return of deadly fire after having been fired upon.”

Cameron also said that the officers’ claim that they knocked and announced themselves was backed by an independent witness.

When a reporter asked why the testimony from just one witness was so credible — especially because out of a dozen witnesses they had spoken to only one said they heard police knock — he said that the jury “got to hear and listened to all the testimony and made the determination that Detective Hankinson was the one that needed to be indicted knowing all of the relative points that you made.”

Perhaps most significant, when asked if he ever presented manslaughter or homicide charges to be considered by the jury, Cameron refused to answer, citing the secrecy of the proceedings, but placed the decision firmly on the jury.

“What I will say is that our team walked them through every homicide offense, and also presented all of the information that was available to the grand jury,” he said. “And then the grand jury was ultimately the one that made the decision about indicting Detective Hankinson for wanton endangerment.”

In the complaint, however, the juror claims that Cameron’s public remarks about the decisions the jury made “further laid those decisions at the feet of the grand jury while failing to answer specific questions regarding the charges presented.”

The complaint alleges that Cameron “attempted to make it very clear that the grand jury alone made the decision on who and what to charge,” and thus imply it was the jury that decided not to bring homicide charges, when in reality, he was the one who never gave them that option in the first place.

“The only exception to the responsibility he foisted upon the grand jurors was in his statement that they ‘agreed’ with his team’s investigation that Mattingly and Cosgrove were justified in their actions,” it continued. 

The complaint then goes on to argue that it is in the public interest to release the records, specifically because so many citizens have shown a lack of faith in the legal proceedings and the justice system itself.

“The public interest spreads across the entire commonwealth when the highest law enforcement official fails to answer questions and instead refers to the grand jury making the decisions,” it said. “It is patently unjust for the jurors to be subjected to the level of accountability the Attorney General campaigned for simply because they received a summons to serve their community.”

Cameron Response and Judge Ruling

Notably, the juror’s request that the records be made public was not the only such petition made Monday. During an arraignment hearing for Hankison — where he pleaded not guilty to all charges — the judge overseeing the case ordered recordings of the grand jury proceedings to be added to the court file by noon Wednesday.

On Monday night, Cameron said that he would follow the judge’s order and release the recordings, and confirmed for the first time that he never asked the jury to consider homicide or manslaughter charges.

In a statement announcing the decision, the attorney general reiterated that he believed the grand jury was meant to be secretive, and that releasing the records “could compromise the ongoing federal investigation and could have unintended consequences such as poisoning the jury pool.”

“Despite these concerns, we will comply with the Judge’s order to release the recording on Wednesday,” he continued, noting that the release “will also address the legal complaint filed by an anonymous grand juror.” 

Cameron also said that he did not have concerns about jurors speaking to the public, arguing that once the public hears the recording, “they will see that over the course of two-and-a-half days, our team presented a thorough and complete case to the Grand Jury,” 

See what others are saying: (The Courier-Journal) (The Washington Post) (CNN)

Continue Reading

U.S.

NYT Report Details Growing Threat of Ransomware Attacks Ahead of the Election

Published

on

  • Tyler Technologies, a software vendor that election officials use to collect and share election results, was recently the victim of a ransomware attack, though details about the attack remain largely unknown.
  • A New York Times report claims Tyler Technologies is one of nearly 1,000 voting systems or groups across the country that have been subject to a hack over the past year. Many of those hacks were conducted by Russian criminal groups. 
  • The Times‘ report details that the United States is very vulnerable to the growing threats of hacking in the election right now as the spread of misinformation and distrust within the country’s political climate already runs rampant.
  • The report indicates that the U.S. is particularly vulnerable to a perception hack, which would involve a hacker spreading misinformation to create distrust about the election results. The FBI has issued warnings about the potential spread of election misinformation in the days after November 3.

Attack at Tyler Technologies

As Election Day looms closer and closer, threats of ransomware attacks are growing larger, according to a recent report from The New York Times

The report indicates that there have been nearly 1,000 attacks against voting systems across the United States over the past year, many of which were conducted by Russian criminal groups. Right now, it is unclear if all of these were traditional ransomware attacks where hackers were simply seeking fast cash, or if they posed a serious threat to the 2020 election. 

One recent attack was lodged against Tyler Technologies, a Texas-based software vendor that election officials use to collect and share election results. Tyler has not released details about the hack, so it is unclear who was behind it or what the purpose of the attack was. Reuters obtained an email the company sent to its customers, which simply explained that there had been a “security incident involving unauthorized access to our internal phone and information technology systems by an unknown third party.”

The Times said it initially looked like an ordinary ransomware attack, but clients later saw outsiders trying to gain access to their systems, raising concern that there could be something larger at play. 

“That has been the fear haunting federal officials for a year now,” the report’s authors, Nicole Perlroth and David E. Sangerthat, wrote. “That in the days leading up to the election, or in its aftermath, ransomware groups will try to freeze voter registration data, election poll books or the computer systems of the secretaries of the state who certify election results.”

Threat of Perception Hacks

Among the potential threats ransomware attacks and hacking pose, the Times noted the specific harm “perception hacks” could have on the United States. The outlet describes these hacks as ransomware attacks that could particularly happen in battleground states and could “create the impression that voters everywhere would not be able to cast their ballots or that the ballots could not be accurately counted.”

“On election night there would be no faster way to create turmoil than altering the reporting of the vote — even if the vote itself was free of fraud,” Perlroth and Sangerthat wrote. 

“That would be a classic perception hack: If Mr. Trump was erroneously declared a winner, for example, and then the vote totals appeared to change, it would be easy to claim someone was fiddling with the numbers.”

These kinds of hacks might only be aided by the fact that President Donald Trump himself has been spreading misinformation about mail-in voting and casting doubt on the election results should he not win. According to the Times, officials fear his unfounded comments about Democrats cheating in the election could even be a signal to hackers, telling them to create just enough incidents to support his false claims of fraud. 

The country’s current political climate creates the perfect storm for Americans being vulnerable to perception hacks. Results of the election will likely take days to be counted, and if Americans are unprepared for the wait, they may be unwilling to accept the final toll.

James Shires, a researcher at the Atlantic Center’s Cyber Statecraft Initiative, spoke to MIT’s Technology Review about the vulnerable position the country is in right now when it comes to any type of hack on the election. Shires compared a potential hack in the U.S. 2020 election to a hack that previously happened in France’s presidential election, noting that America’s response would be very different from France’s. 

“The effect of a hacking operation really comes from the underlying political context and in that case the US is far worse now than it was in 2016,” Shires explained.

“If you look at the Macron leaks, which happened shortly before the French president was elected, a lot of things from the party were put online. French media got together, the candidate communicated, and they agreed not to publish stories based on these leaks before the election. There is a lot of trust and community spirit in the French media and political environment. That is clearly not the case in the US at the moment.”

What is Being Done About These Threats?

Because the impact of any potential hack could be severe and sow discord throughout the already divided country, the FBI has warned that in the days after the election, the public could see “disinformation that includes reports of voter suppression, cyberattacks targeting election infrastructure, voter or ballot fraud, and other problems intended to convince the public of the elections’ illegitimacy.”

As for efforts to prevent these attacks from happening, some officials have said that progress is being made. However, the Times reported that in the first two weeks of September alone, seven American government entities had been hit with ransomware and had their data stolen.

“The chance of a local government not being hit while attempting to manage the upcoming and already ridiculously messy election would seem to be very slim,” Brett Callow, a threat analyst at a security firm called Emsisoft told the Times.

See what others are saying: (New York Times) (Reuters) (Technology Review)

Continue Reading

U.S.

Boy Gifts Firefighters Baby Yoda Doll. Now They Take It Everywhere

Published

on

  • To show his appreciation for firefighters in Oregon, five-year-old Carver gifted local workers a Baby Yoda doll, writing in a thank you note, “Here is a friend for you, in case you get lonely.”
  • The firefighters loved it so much, they even bring Baby Yoda with them everywhere and document his travels on Facebook.
  • The page, “Baby Yoda fights fires,” is loaded with heartwarming photos of Baby Yoda with frontline workers in different states.
  • The gesture has brought joy to firefighters who have been working tirelessly to battle the raging wildfires burning throughout the West Coast.

The Boy’s Donation

A five-year-old boy in Oregon has put smiles on the faces of several firefighters with a unique gift: a Baby Yoda doll.

When the boy, whose name is Carver, learned about the fires ranging on in his home state, he told his grandmother he wanted to do something to help the heroes on the frontline. 

His grandmother, Sasha Tinning, then learned about a local donation drive for firefighters in their area, so she took Carver shopping for groceries and other items they could take. 

At the store, Carver set his eyes on one the doll, which, of course, is the beloved Star Wars character from the Disney + series “The Mandalorian.”

When Carver gifted the doll, he attached a note that read: “Thank you, firefighters. Here is a friend for you, in case you get lonely <3 Love, Carver.”

Baby Yoda Fights Fires

The firefighters absolutely loved the gift. In fact, they loved it so much, they even bring Baby Yoda with them everywhere and document his travels on Facebook.

The page is called “Baby Yoda fights fires,” and it’s loaded with heartwarming photos of Baby Yoda with frontline workers in different states.

It’s safe to say Carver’s gesture definitely helped bring so much needed joy as firefighters work to battle the raging wildfires burning throughout the West Coast.

These firefighters are away from their children, their loved ones. This is a little pal that brings a bit of normalcy to a crazy time,” Carver’s grandmother told CNN.

“To have a little bit of sunshine during such a dark time, I think that’s really special for them. He (Baby Yoda) is also just cute as the dickens.”

See what others are saying: (CNN) (Good News Network)

Continue Reading