I Love You, Now Die: The Commonwealth Vs. Michelle Carter is a documentary based on the story of the death of an eighteen-year-old, Roy Conrad, in 2014, and the case that followed against his alleged killer. Michelle Carter, who was seventeen at the time, was accused of having a hand in his suicide (Rossi & Carr, 2019). The documentary was released in two parts; the first details the prosecution's argument while the second focuses on the defence. Conrad and Carter had been in a long-distance relationship, having met up physically very few times. Although they lived an hour's drive from each other, the two teenagers relied on text messages and emails for communication. Both of them had a history of mental illness; Conrad had attempted suicide several times while Carter's had occasionally been to therapy (Rossi & Carr, 2019). Carter was indicted on February 2015, almost a year after the death of Conrad. She was accused of involuntary manslaughter, evidenced by the series of text messages between her and Conrad.
The prosecution argued that she not only implored Conrad to commit suicide; she did nothing to change his mind. On the fateful day that Conrad gassed himself to death in his truck, he called Carter because he was scared to go through with his plan (Rossi & Carr, 2019). Carter encouraged him to get back to his truck and get over with it. She even reassured him that it would be painless and quick. The defence argues that her right to privacy protected the text messages sent by Carter.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Further, the defence implored the court to consider previous texts where Carter attempted to get Conrad to seek medical help. They pointed out that Conrad had brought out the idea for them to kill themselves together, like Romeo and Juliet (Rossi & Carr, 2019). The trial took a little more than three years, and Carter was found guilty and sentenced to fifteen months in prison.
The uniqueness of the case gathered much attention from the public. It became a hot topic on social media platforms like Twitter and YouTube, where people gave their unsolicited opinions. The judicial system was equally appalled by the case because it was the first of its kind, especially with the telecommunication factor. Conrad and Carter's ages were also an issue of interest since they were legally minors.
In the final trial, Carter waived her right to a jury, most likely under the advisement of her counsel (Rossi & Carr, 2019). The defence's mistrust of the jury was because the internet had provided so much information and opinions about the case, some even untrue. Therefore, they suspected that most members of the jury were bound to see the posts on the internet and would have been biased in making the judgment. The anti-Carter internet posts had taken their text conversations out of context.
I believe that Carter had Conrad’s best intentions at heart when she talked him into getting back in the truck. As noted earlier, they were both suffering from mental illnesses. Conrad’s father and grandfather have physically abused Conrad. He must have felt safe and understood with Carter because she had been in similar situations. Conrad had had the idea to commit suicide long before he met Carter, so she did not plant the seed inside him. Unlike his relatives, friends, and the public, Carter had an inner perspective on the pain Conrad was going through. When Conrad first brought up the desire to end his life, Carter advised him to seek therapy. She even suggested the hospital she had received therapy from, but Conrad did not follow her advice. The more the conversations, the more Carter must have realized that Conrad felt the only way out was to kill himself. She must have come to the conclusion that however inhumane it would be, it was her duty as his friend to support him.
Carter must have trusted Conrad's decision-making skills since he was older than her, and after all, it was his life in question. In a text to her friend, Carter says she told Conrad to get back in the truck filling up with carbon monoxide because she knew he would do it again (Rossi & Carr, 2019). She realized that he was stuck in a cycle of abuse, pain, and suicide attempts. With each day, the cycle was weighing him down. Therefore, the push Carter gave in their last phone call was to free him from his pain, a form of euthanasia. Unfortunately, Conrad's family did not consider their failure in helping him when he was alive. They channelled that despair of unprocessed guilt to an unfair rage against Carter. My approach is strictly emotional. However, in terms of the law and the evidence at hand, Carter was indeed guilty, and the judge ruled correctly. Nevertheless, it was very considerate of the court to give a mild sentence to Carter since the final decision to commit suicide was made by Conrad.
The case shed a lot of light on teenagers' mental state and the lack of mature and knowledgeable people they could speak to instead of their peers. Conrad's death and Carter's imprisonment should teach parents and guardians to be more involved in their children’s lives.
Reference
Rossi Andrew (Producer), & Carr Erin Lee (Director). (2019). I Love You, Now Die: The Commonwealth Vs. Michelle Carter. HBO
