Michelle Carter Case Study

862 Words4 Pages
Partisanship and Misconceptions
Introduction
The saying “the pen is mightier than the sword” is widely known and referenced. However, contrary to popular belief, actions may speak louder than words. This rings true in the case of Michelle Carter, this specific case has been a reoccurring debate, in terms of whether Michelle Carter should be found guilty or not guilty for the death of her boyfriend, Conrad Roy III. While those in favor of her being found guilty seek imprisonment, others, like the opposing side, seek to have her let off due to the situation not being entirely her fault.
Summary
In the article “Flowers: Woman who goaded boyfriend to commit suicide must pay for dark act,” Christine Flowers argues in favor of Michelle Carter being held accountable for the death of her boyfriend, Conrad Roy III. Flowers offers two reasons as to why Michelle Carter should be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter: She “actively encouraged” him to kill himself knowing that her boyfriend was emotionally unstable and confined in her and told him to “get back in” after he got out of the car filled with carbon monoxide seeking her guidance (3). Furthermore, Flowers presents counterarguments that seek Carter should not do time in prison: for example, Flowers claims that the reason Conrad Roy ultimately killed himself was because her words “get back in”, were “the proximate cause of his death” (3). In the end, Flowers concludes by saying Michelle Carter should “pay for her dark act,
Open Document