Guy Who Encouraged People To Commit Suicide Online Banned From The Internet
from the seems-a-bit-extreme dept
We recently wrote about the disturbing case of William Melchert-Dinkel, a guy who would troll various online suicide forums, claiming to be a nurse, who would then encourage people to go through with their suicide plans, sometimes making suicide pacts with them. As we pointed out at the time, there's really no way to defend what this guy did. He's clearly a sick individual. But, we were concerned about him being charged with "assisted suicide" in Minnesota, where the law seems especially broad, and questionable on First Amendment grounds, because it outlawed just "advising" people on suicide.In the latest on that case, Melchert-Dinkel has been ordered to stay off the internet completely while the case is ongoing. Like the lawsuit itself, an order like this, seems to raise a lot of questions. I could understand ordering him to stay away from any discussions about suicide, but a blanket internet ban, again, seems like it goes too far. Does it include a VoIP phone? With so much on the internet these days, can you really effectively bar someone from using the internet? We've seen courts that have regularly overturned such bans, claiming that they're unreasonably excessive.
While there's no way to defend what this guy did, so far this whole case seems to go in dangerous directions, both from the standpoint of free speech questions, as well as overly aggressive internet bans, due to one particular activity done on the internet.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: assisted suicide, free speech, internet ban, william melchert-dinkel
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
right..
He may not be doing the right thing so to speak.. but he is not forcing anyone to commit suicide.. the individual has total control over doing it or not.
besides.. doing stuff like this.. just make martyrs you know?, out of nowhere with streisand effect included you'll see more traffic on suicide.. and maybe even a slighly higher rate of suicide.
but then again.. thats barely my opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: right..
Since suicidal tendencies still exist, there must be some over-arching benefit to the human genome that we're just not seeing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: right..
Are you suggesting that there's some positive benefit to cerebral palsy? If not, why hasn't that been bred out? Or Cancer, for that matter? How about really stinky flatuelance?
There is anomalous data in everything to do with life.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: right..
None of these is a valid comparison.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: right..
Causes of suicide:
1. Mental Disorder presents in cases of successful and attempted suicide in roughly 90% of cases:
A. Mood Disorder - Chiefly environmental causes
B. Substance Addiction - Both psycho-social and
hereditary causes
C. Schizophrenia - Both psycho-social, but primarily
hereditary causes
2. Genetics - Genes are established to be a primary player in determining suicidal tendencies, both for the mental illness factors listed above, as well as other factors. Genetics factors in for somewhere between 30%-50% of suicide cases.
3. Sociol and socio-ecnomomic factors are the only true "just chose to do it" causes of suicide, and account for less than 10% of total suicide cases.
In other words, it's a variable in which the preponderance of cases are not simply choice, but usually factor in some form of gentic relationship, not at all unlike the variables I described above, which you summarily dismissed....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: right..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: right..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: right..
To provoke some serious discourse upon the nature of suicide (and the possible function of suicide) within human society.
Besides, if even "normal" (in quotes 'cause I've never met one) people are committing suicide, then perhaps it's simply a part of who we are--something that comes with being human.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: right..
My boss bought pizza for lunch, and I've been in a minor food coma ever since. I'm starting to think I'm going to shit my shwartz soon...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: right..
Just keep in mind that people's issues with suicide aren't inherent, they're cultural. Many cultures have a reverence (or at least cultural appreciation) of suicide. We happen to come from a judeo-christian culture, which places a strong negative cultural taboo on the subject. Many others do not, especially when couched as 'self sacrifice' (suicide with a purpose).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: right..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: right..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: right..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: right..
So you can breed with anybody you want, as often as you want? Must be nice! ;-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: right..
Hell, all I have to do is wink at a girl, and BAM!....pregnant....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dad?
Oh wait, maybe I'm thinking of that other dark helmet guy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dad?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Which is harder?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Which is harder?
i think it comes down to the fact that you cannot enforce such a ban.
are you going to lock him in a cell for the rest of his life? 24/7 surveillance? sure you can probably see if he has broadband by pulling his cable/phone bill and make sure he's not dialing up by tapping his home phone, but can you keep him out of every public and private place that might offer him internet access?
in the end the ban doesn't matter because it cannot be enforced.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jail?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The thing for a person on the receiving end of such an order is that if it is violated and the violation is discovered the court has several remedies immediately at hand, not the least of which is holding the individual in contempt and incarcerating him/her.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What was first ruled about the law was the following :
Internet is now a fundamental right, and as such, no one should be barred from using internet. Many things runs over the internet nowaday, including, but not limited to, emails and thus, eventual social life with people.
It was something along those lines anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Once again....
Right, because it would seem that depraved indifference would be the statute here. 2nd Degree Murder is a better charge than assisted suicide....unless you're trying to make headlines, of course....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can't arrest somebody for being an asshole. If you could, everyone in New York would be on death row.
- Cops and Robbersons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There Are A Lot Of
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Under ordinary circumstances, I'd say this was definitely a cruel and unusual punishment, but under the circumstances he deserves it. Unlike "pirates", he did something to directly affect peoples' lives (and basically committed murder by proxy IMHO) and deserves punishment. I would hope that if he just used a mobile phone with internet capability or VoIP then they might be more lenient about prosecuting a violation of the ban on internet access, but I have zero sympathy for this type of sicko.
Actually, the most disturbing thing I'm taking away from this is that there are forums devoted to people considering suicide. People need help, of course, but with the trolls and other idiots on every other forum on the net, I can't imagine how dangerous a forum for suicidal individuals must be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But heck... some people would think it's a good idea: www.waragainsttheweak.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Buck v. Bell
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And where were the moderators?
It is the responsibility of a forum to monitor and police its members. I have moderated a car site of all things and a troll like this would survive about 10 minutes before being banned down to the MAC level.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Should we?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Should we?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cultural Honor
“Suicide has never been criminalized in Japan. Japanese society's attitude toward suicide has been termed "tolerant," and on many occasions a suicide is seen as a morally responsible action.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Japan
Cyber bullying laws are not the answer, Trolling laws are not the answer. This guy did nothing more than exploit a weakness, which happens everyday, all day long. People are going to put themselves out there, some with positive and some with negative results. You can’t legislate against people “being mean and nasty” to others.
As the world’s economies worsen over the next 10 years due to excessive debt, I would argue that more people will be investigating suicide. I predict the EU countries will have an upswing in suicides as they are forced to change their way of life. This single guy is just the tip of the iceberg and as more people in the US and EU lose their houses and futures, there will be more people like this guy who will come out of the woodwork.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You have no right to food?
How about pen and paper. Do you have right to paper (you know, freedom of expression?), I mean, paper is an object, and a pen is a tool. Maybe someone who wrote letters to people to get them to kill themselves could be forced to never touch a pen, or a typewriter. Yeah, it's not like they'll need it to maybe write a check or anything?
All objects, all tools.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The internet is not a right. Stop treating it like it is. I don't want this guy on my internet.
And suicidal advice may not be covered by the first amendment. There is plenty of speech that isn't. Like slander.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think that this guy should be in prison tonight and not walking the streets. He is the most evil man.
Free speech is a noble concept for sure, but I think it is a bit of a stretch to let this maggot hide behind first ammendment rights. Free speech advocates think that we should be able to say anything. I don't agree. There must be reasonable limitations. For example, is it okay to encourage a blind person to walk over a cliff? No! Is it okay to seek out people who are in trouble and encourage them to take their lives just for your amusement? No! Is that what America's founding fathers had in mind when they talked about free speech? Hell No! Free speech means that you can express your political beliefs etc., not harm/target vulnerable people.
Please look at this tv documentary prepared by Bob McKeown who is a former Dateline NBC reporter. He tells the story from Nadia's vantage point. You will see what an evil person you are defending.
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2009-2010/death_online/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Also keep in mind that there is no law against being evil, only against specific acts. There are evil things people do that violate no law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Melchart Dinkel has also told authorities that he pretended that he was a woman to make it harder for people to identify him. This demonstrates his awareness that he was doing was wrong. He also disclosed the motivation for what he did, saying that he did it for "THE THRILL OF THE CHASE". For me, that statement really says it all.
Listen, by proscecuting people like this, nobody is going to take away any American freedoms. That's not even on the menu. It's about whether it is okay for criminals like Mr. Dinkel to go on the internet, seek out people who are in trouble and then manipulate them with the intention of doing them harm.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Melchart Dinkel has also told authorities that he pretended that he was a woman to make it harder for people to identify him. This demonstrates his awareness that he was doing was wrong. He also disclosed the motivation for what he did, saying that he did it for "THE THRILL OF THE CHASE". For me, that statement really says it all.
Listen, by proscecuting people like this, nobody is going to take away any American freedoms. That's not even on the menu. It's about whether it is okay for criminals like Mr. Dinkel to go on the internet, seek out people who are in trouble and then manipulate them with the intention of doing them harm.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't know for sure, but that is probably not the crime that he committed. I can't imagine the DA had the option and a strong case for murder, and decided to go with this other law instead. If they didn't charge him with murder, it's probably because what he did is not described by Minnesota's (if I remember the state right) murder statute.
Listen, by proscecuting people like this, nobody is going to take away any American freedoms. That's not even on the menu. It's about whether it is okay for criminals like Mr. Dinkel to go on the internet, seek out people who are in trouble and then manipulate them with the intention of doing them harm.
No controversy there. But what do you think about the law? Is it possible to charge someone for giving any advice about suicide, or only someone who advises another that they ought to commit suicide? Is it well-written and focused, or overly broad and possibly unconstitutional? That's really a much more interesting question here, because obviously what he did was wrong and we don't want him or anybody else doing that anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't recall anyone defending this guy's actions, only pointing out potential 1st Amendment problems with this legislation.
this person should have a VIP spot in HELL!
Which of course has nothing to do with what the courts should do to him. He must be judged according to the law, not according to what we think should happen to him in the next life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
suicide
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
poopy popsicle
Trust me, I'm a nurse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ridiculous
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ridiculous
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
suicide
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guy who encouraged people to commit suicide
[ link to this | view in chronology ]