This is not some new precedent really. There are pretty well defined exceptions to free speech and this falls far on the side of illegal speech. In specific thi

This is not some new precedent really. There are pretty well defined exceptions to free speech and this falls far on the side of illegal speech. In specific this was speech explicitly inciting violence with a clear and present danger of succeeding. This has already been established by previous cases. The only thing that was argued was whether her speech had a reasonable chance of inciting him to kill himself, which was proven in court by the prosecution. Other than this, the trial is a textbook case of manslaughter similar to asking someone to light themselves on fire or inciting a riot.