“Get back in the car.”
These are the words Michelle Carter allegedly spoke to her boyfriend, Roy Conrad, when he exited his carbon monoxide filled vehicle because he was scared to die. Twenty minutes later the phone call ended, and so did Conrad’s life.
Roy Conrad died of Carbon Monoxide poisoning on July 13th 2014 in a car park. What was initially considered a cut-and-dry case of suicide, took a sinister turn when a series of text messages were uncovered. Conrad’s girlfriend at the time, Michelle Carter, appears to actively support and encourage Conrad’s suicidal thoughts in the messages. Carter repeatedly attacks Conrad, saying, “YOU KEEP PUSHING IT OFF! (…) I bet you’re gonna be like ‘oh, it didn’t work because I didn’t tape the tube right or something like that’… I bet you’re gonna say an excuse like that.”
These provocations of suicide were interspersed with declarations of love (“You’re my heart, I’d never leave you”) creating a compelling tapestry of apparent manipulation and deceit which the media clung to. Carter was branded a sociopath and convicted for her part in the death of her boyfriend.
Earlier this month, a new true crime documentary, I Love You, Now Die, was released on Sky. It has brought the 2014 case of Carter and Conrad back into the spotlight, and with it, the issue of suicide and responsibility. Although sickening, the documentary offers a previously unseen perspective into the case.
It suggests that Carter’s own mental illness was the source of her pressure on Conrad to kill himself. Carter suffered from clinical depression, and took medication which a doctor explained may have altered her mental state and capacity to make decisions. This, paired with the exclusively online nature of their relationship, created an air of fantasy surrounding the consequences of her actions.
The documentary also notes the emotional strain (paramount to manipulation) placed on Carter from her boyfriend. For months on end he insisted he was going to kill himself ‘tonight’, to the distress of his girlfriend. In fact, it was only a month before his eventual suicide – when Carter’s mental health worsened – that she switched from pleading that he sought help in a mental institution to helping him die.
Tweets following the release of the programme highlighted a division in opinion. One viewer branded Carter ‘a disgusting human being’, while another believed the case was not one of homicide, but rather ‘A story of love and two fucked up kids.’ Although some support the idea of suicide culpability as a criminal offence, many viewers find themselves questioning whether the system put in place is just at all.
It is exactly this controversy which highlights the obscure and morally grey nature of the idea of suicide culpability. Underpinning this entire case are rather philosophical questions of social responsibility: who is held accountable for a death, the hand that committed the act, or a voice that commanded it? Is it fair to see a person as culpable for another’s suicide?
Current law in the US rules that inciting suicide in another, although not a murder offence, is deemed manslaughter and solicits a sentence of up to fourteen years. However, within the law there still lies much obscurity about how we choose to treat such cases: factors such as mental illness, prior manipulation, and the rise of online relationships and communication, all prevent any clarity of procedure. Each judge and jury have their own opinion regarding what constitutes a just sentence, therefore it appears impossible for any base line of legality to be set.
In the end, Michelle Carter was charged with involuntary manslaughter and sentenced to 15 months in jail. Perhaps had she had a different judge, she would be a free woman today. However, instead we are left to consider, ‘Was her sentence just?’ It appears to be all a matter of opinion.
Image Credit: rollingstone.com