Reconsidering criminal liability for encouraging suicide in South African law through the lens of Commonwealth v Carter

ARTICLE

Reconsidering criminal liability for encouraging suicide in South African law through the lens of Commonwealth v Carter

Author: Dr Jacques Matthee

ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: LLB, LLM, LLD. Senior lecturer in law, University of the Free State
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 38 Issue 1, p. 114-133
https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/v38/i1a5

Abstract

In 2017, Michelle Carter was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the United States for encouraging her boyfriend, Conrad Roy, to die by suicide, despite being nowhere near the scene at the time of his death. Her conviction, based primarily on text messages and phone calls, raises complex legal questions about causation, culpability, and the limits of criminal liability for speech alone. This article reconsiders criminal liability for encouraging suicide in South Africa through the lens of the Carter case to assess whether a similar outcome could be reached under South African law. While South African courts have addressed assisted suicide and supplying the means for suicide, the legal position on verbal encouragement, particularly through digital communication, remains underdeveloped. The only relevant precedent, Ex parte Minister van Justisie: In re S v Grotjohn, offers limited guidance, having been decided decades before the advent of phenomena such as social media and cyberbullying. This article argues that the Carter case invites a critical re-evaluation of South Africa’s legal principles to address the unique harms of virtual suicide encouragement. It identifies legal gaps and advocates for developing a tailored causation approach standard and statutory reforms to better protect vulnerable individuals from psychological manipulation while upholding fundamental principles of justice.

Offender Rehabilitation Programs. The Role of the Prison Officer by I Small and P Hackett

BOOK REVIEW

Offender Rehabilitation Programs. The Role of the Prison Officer by I Small and P Hackett

Author: Geoff Harris

ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: BCom DipEd (Melb) MEc (La Trobe) PhD (New England) Professor, International Centre of Nonviolence, Durban University of Technology
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 37 Issue 3, p. 186-188
https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/v38/i1a9

Abstract

None

The ambit and purpose of the crime of public violence

The ambit and purpose of the crime of public violence

Author: Shannon Hoctor

ISSN: 1996-2118
Affiliations: BA LLB LLM (UCT) DJuris (Leiden) PG Dip (Latin) (Wales Trinity Saint David); Professor, Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, Stellenbosch University
Source: South African Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 37 Issue 3, p. 289-312
https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/v37/i3a1

Abstract

The roots of the crime of public violence may be found in Roman law, but the modern South African crime has developed through case law, principally based on the definition of the crime found in the works of the Roman-Dutch institutional writer Van der Linden. While there is wide agreement regarding the elements of the crime, the content of such elements is not always very clear and is subject to the qualifying element of the crime: that the conduct should assume serious dimensions. It is contended that the crime may be committed by means of force rather than violence and that this can occur in the context of either the disturbance of peace and security or the invasion of the rights of others. Moreover, it is pointed out that the structure of the crime incorporates the common purpose doctrine, where liability is based on the accused’s conduct in associating himself or herself with the crime being committed, rather than personally committing the unlawful conduct. The implications of these aspects are explored in the context of the application of the crime of public violence to unlawful protest actions.