3 ms·

He didn't have to wait for appeals that might take years, but he didn't even wait for a jury or judge to weigh in on the situation. That could have let him off

by slg 6y ago

He didn't have to wait for appeals that might take years, but he didn't even wait for a jury or judge to weigh in on the situation. That could have let him off without spending any time in jail. The first sentence of my first comment said the prosecutor was too aggressive. I'm not trying to make 6 months of jail sound reasonable for his crime. I am trying to point out that suicide is not a reasonable response to the situation Aaron was in.

wtallis 6y ago
> I am trying to point out that suicide is not a reasonable response to the situation Aaron was in. No, you're not. Nobody is claiming that suicide was a reasonable response to the situation he was in; that's not what you're trying to rebut. What you're arguing against is the suggestion that the overzealous prosecution should bear some degree of culpability for his suicide. Whether his suicide was a reasonable decision doesn't really matter to that question. People do "unreasonable" things all the time, and it is quite ordinary in many circumstances to expect other people to account for that possibility.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- slg 6y ago
  >No, you're not. Nobody is claiming that suicide was a reasonable response to the situation he was in; They claimed suicide was a "reasonably foreseeable outcome". My point is that the decision was not reasonable and therefore the outcome isn't to be expected. >People do "unreasonable" things all the time, and it is quite ordinary in many circumstances to expect other people to account for that possibility. Ok, if we are going to hold people legally liable for the most extreme response to their actions, let's build a similar hypothetical. Imagine a similar situation in which a prosecutor is unjustly but legally railroading a person (reminder Aaron was guilty of a crime and no one argues against that, we just argue that the law he broke is unjust). If the person being prosecuted murders the person who pressed charges, does the prosecutor have culpability?
DanBC 6y ago
> I am trying to point out that suicide is not a reasonable response to the situation Aaron was in Suicide is almost never a "reasonable" response to the situation a person is in, yet it's a very common cause of death. People who work in suicide prevention talk about "rapid onset despair". They also talk about help seeking behaviour, especially of people who are men; young; autistic; and a few other characteristics. Rapid onset despair is very important when talking about the criminal justice system. People feel overwhelmed by CJS, and death by suicide is very common in people who've been arrested for serious crime or who have been imprisoned. Deaths by suicide of people who've been accused of, or convicted of, offences is not hidden information. It's a well known phenomena.
- slg 6y ago
  Would anyone in that suicide prevention community suggest that whoever's actions inadvertently triggered the rapid onset despair should be held legally liable if the person succumbs to suicide?

by slg 6y ago

wtallis 6y ago

> I am trying to point out that suicide is not a reasonable response to the situation Aaron was in. No, you're not. Nobody is claiming that suicide was a reasonable response to the situation he was in; that's not what you're trying to rebut. What you're arguing against is the suggestion that the overzealous prosecution should bear some degree of culpability for his suicide. Whether his suicide was a reasonable decision doesn't really matter to that question. People do "unreasonable" things all the time, and it is quite ordinary in many circumstances to expect other people to account for that possibility.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
slg 6y ago
>No, you're not. Nobody is claiming that suicide was a reasonable response to the situation he was in; They claimed suicide was a "reasonably foreseeable outcome". My point is that the decision was not reasonable and therefore the outcome isn't to be expected. >People do "unreasonable" things all the time, and it is quite ordinary in many circumstances to expect other people to account for that possibility. Ok, if we are going to hold people legally liable for the most extreme response to their actions, let's build a similar hypothetical. Imagine a similar situation in which a prosecutor is unjustly but legally railroading a person (reminder Aaron was guilty of a crime and no one argues against that, we just argue that the law he broke is unjust). If the person being prosecuted murders the person who pressed charges, does the prosecutor have culpability?

DanBC 6y ago

> I am trying to point out that suicide is not a reasonable response to the situation Aaron was in Suicide is almost never a "reasonable" response to the situation a person is in, yet it's a very common cause of death. People who work in suicide prevention talk about "rapid onset despair". They also talk about help seeking behaviour, especially of people who are men; young; autistic; and a few other characteristics. Rapid onset despair is very important when talking about the criminal justice system. People feel overwhelmed by CJS, and death by suicide is very common in people who've been arrested for serious crime or who have been imprisoned. Deaths by suicide of people who've been accused of, or convicted of, offences is not hidden information. It's a well known phenomena.

slg 6y ago
Would anyone in that suicide prevention community suggest that whoever's actions inadvertently triggered the rapid onset despair should be held legally liable if the person succumbs to suicide?