It has just occurred to me that the charge of ‘assisting a suicide’ is superfluous

Published: April 16, 2014 at 3:18am

Given that Erin Tanti is an adult and Lisa Maria Zahra was 15, it would be murder in any case, because of the adult-minor context. That is the point we are overlooking. It has only just occurred to me.

If a 15-year-old I knew well came to me and asked for help in killing herself, and I gave her a huge quantity of pills then drove her to the cliffs, that would technically be murder, not suicide.

And it would be immediately obvious as murder because, at 49, the fact that I am an adult is not in dispute.

The legal context does not change simply because Erin Tanti is 23 and I am 49. At law, we have exactly the same status as adults.

I believe the charge of ‘assisting a suicide’, like many of the other difficulties in how this case is seen, arises from the failure to perceive Erin Tanti as an adult. The perception, instead, is of a teenager or a not-quite-adult. In the charge of assisting a suicide, he and his victim are placed at par, which they are not.

Had Erin Tanti been my age, a man of 49, he would not have been charged with ‘assisting the suicide’ of a girl of 15. He would have been charged only with her murder.




18 Comments Comment

  1. Just Saying says:

    I don’t think that the fact pattern of this crime could have been dreamt up by a criminal law professor. Is he being charged with murder or manslaughter? Murder #1 or Murder #2?

  2. coffee smells and all that …

  3. giac says:

    I don’t think it is superfluous, the crime has to be divided in segments and in every step of its perpetration.

    He took her there to commit suicide and thus the act to commit such crime of assisting a suicide was consumed.

    Then he assisted her more or pushed her off the cliff and she died, then its murder.

    Another thing is that the charges are issued according to the evidence collected before the arraignment then the after the compilation of evidence is terminated and the PV is sent to the Attorney-General, the AG will look into the evidence and issue the bill of indictment accordingly.

  4. winston psaila says:

    What we have gathered so far about this perceived adult is that because he produces stuff about various parts of the human anatomy and writes rubbish which he calls poetry, he thinks himself as immersed in the Arts. Quite likely he sees himself as a latter-day Shakespeare.

    Well, had he been truly acquainted with the real Poet, he would surely have come across:

    ‘………………Naught’s had, all’s spent
    Where our desire is got without content;
    ‘Tis safer to be that which we destroy,
    Then by destruction dwell in doubtful joy.’

  5. Alexander Ball says:

    He’s had his parents sitting next to him in court. All part of the charade that he is in some way a minor himself.

  6. Lord Lucan says:

    He is finished either way! Prison for life, for 15 years, or even a paltry say 8 years, it’s game over for him.

    The way I see things is that probably the safest place for this delinquent is in prison, on the outside he is unprotected and on the inside the worst that can happen is that he gets to have a same-sex civil union, albeit unwillingly.

  7. John Micallef says:

    I totally agree with your train of thought on this one, but it’s difficult not to perceive Erin Tanti as an adult since he was a guardian of the child.

    The fact that he chose to be a “teacher” and took that responsibility he is judging himself and “admitting” that he is an adult. His signature on his (as a teacher) work contract should be enough to confirm that he agrees that he is an adult.

    Hopefully no “insanity plea” will be agreed to.

  8. Natalie says:

    I think that assisting in a suicide always amounts to murder whether the victim is a minor or not. However ‘assisting to a suicide’ gives more detail about the crime than simply ‘murder’.

    Another puzzling point that I find about the whole story is that Tanti messaged Lisa Zahra that he ‘has everything they need’ and she answered ‘What do you mean?’

    I can’t understand how she conceded in committing suicide by taking Aspirin and whiskey later on when suicide was clearly not on her mind.

  9. MYL says:

    Whichever way a mature person looks at this tragedy, it is WRONG… even if nothing had happened on that fateful night, he still shouldn’t have been there, dated her, plied her with alcohol/pills, given her those poems, etc…

    Every single thing which connects him to Lisa, apart from him being her teacher (and he’s got some proving to do even in that sphere), is wrong and immoral.

  10. double jeopardy says:

    Section 213 of the Criminal Code makes no distinction as to whether the perpetrator prevailing on the victim or assisting her to commit suicide is an “adult” or not — in any case, criminal responsibility begins at age 14 not 18 [vide art. 35 of the Criminal Code].

    If one gave a minor a quantity of pills and she willingly swallowed them with the intention of committing suicide and the suicide takes place, then it is not wilful homicide on the part of the giver of the pills.

    It may be assisting to commit suicide, depending on the intention of the perpetrator. Even if the perpetrator “prevails” on the victim to commit suicide, it is still the offence under article 213.

    One has to see how the court would interpret the word “prevails”. To what extent does “prevailing” differ from compelling someone to commit suicide, in which case, I would think, it would amount to willful homicide? We do not seem to have many precedents in Malta and one will presumably have to resort to foreign jurisprudence and jurists.

    I therefore don’t see how the “adult-minor” context fits in. If the giver of the pills used force — which apparently must be such as to be more than prevailing — to compel the other to swallow the pills and jump off, then it is another matter altogether.

    [Daphne – Aren’t you missing something? Those who supply the heroin which kills an addict are not charged with assisting suicide. They are charged with homicide. Does it make a difference if the drugs are legal or illegal? The addict takes the heroin willingly, and even pays for it.]

    Perhaps what you have in mind is that Erin Tanti had such a psychological ascendance on the victim that it amounted to compelling her to take the pills and jump off the cliffs against her will. That would be very difficult to prove I think. If he pushed her off himself, then it would be a different matter, of course.

    One must keep in mind at all times that it all depends on what the intention of the perpetrator of the crime was. This is the all-important feature. Was it to assist in suicide or was it to commit willful homicide?

    [Daphne – This is so unbelievable. You determinedly and deliberately miss or avoid the crucial element here: that you, a grown adult, cannot ‘assist the suicide’ of a child. This is not an adult-to-adult situation here. The grown man who ‘assists the suicide’ of a child is, actually, killing that child. Children are no more free to take a decision to kill themselves than they are to vote, marry, stay out all night, or run off with a lover. They are not 18. That’s why they are children.]

    Of course, in the end, it is a matter of proving what this intention (mens rea) was. One may speculate that it is the difficulty of proving what the intention of Erin Tanti was that lies behind the inclusion of both charges. It will be for the jury to decide on the facts what the intentions of the perpetrator were. I think this case is going to be a “cause celebre” in Maltese jurisprudence.

    All this is simply my opinion. I do hope I do not seem like some boring lecturer. In that case, please just omit to upload and come to the rescue of your readers.

  11. xxx says:

    It is precisely what I said in a previous post…when I said he was guilty of killing her because being an adult, and a teacher, he should have supported her and informed her family rather than given her pills, whisky and a lift to her death.

  12. double jeopardy says:

    Given the emotional aspect which has become associated with this case and the fact that it might not be clear from the evidence available to the prosecution as to whether it is a case of assisted suicide or willful homicide, perhaps the defence might consider opting for a bench trial rather than a trial by jury.

    Given that there seem to be no eye-witnesses to the crime and the defendant has not confessed, it is probable that the prosecution would rely quite heavily on forensic evidence to establish the facts, i.e. whether the actus reus consisted in the defendant actually pushing the victim over the cliff — the defendant claims she jumped.

    If he pushed the victim over and with the intention of killing her or putting her life in manifest jeopardy, then there is both the malicious act (actus reus) and the intention (mens rea) and the crime would be willful homicide not assisted suicide.

  13. David says:

    Since Maltese criminal law on suicide is based on Italian law, the latter should be examined as an aid in interpreting Maltese law. http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istigazione_o_aiuto_al_suicidio

  14. David says:

    In view of the above I am again reproducing the Maltese law (Article 213, Criminal Code).

    “Whosoever shall prevail on any person to commit suicide
    or shall give him any assistance, shall, if the suicide takes place, be liable, on conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve years.”

  15. Jack Spiteri says:

    If Erin Tanti was 49 years old then yes he would be expected to act accordingly. But just because there is no legal difference between a 23 and 49 year old that does not mean that there isn’t a practical one.

    The truth is that Erin Tanti was much closer to Lisa’s age then your own.

    Despite being a legal adult I think that ideally a distinction would be made which reflects the person’s age specifically. This being said even as a 23 year old I would have expected much more from him when dealing with a teenager. My point however is that there is a clear difference between how a 23 and 49 year old would be expected to react in any situation.

    [Daphne – Oh, this is where you are absolutely wrong. At Erin Tanti’s age, I had THREE CHILDREN OF MY OWN to look after. If anything had happened to them, no court in the world would have given me a lighter sentence on the basis that I was 23 and not 49. Unfortunately, youth has been prolonged socially so far beyond adulthood-in-law-and-biology that we tend to forget that only one or two generations back, Erin Tanti, at 23, would have been married and providing for a wife, a baby and putting a roof over all their heads and paying the bills. And a generation further back than that, he would have been off fighting some war somewhere. Effectively, at 23 I had far more and greater responsibilities than I do now at 49. At 23, people are fully cognisant of their responsibilities. If they are not, there is something seriously wrong with their mental and emotional development.

    There certainly should not be a legal distinction between responsibility towards children at 23 and at 49. For starters, people of 49 generally do not have minor children, whereas it is entirely normal for people in their 20s to do so. So what are you saying here: that people in their 20s, who are of an age when they have young children, should be less legally liable for behaving responsibility towards them than people in their late 40s, who would normally not have young children?]

  16. wow says:

    The more I read about this , the more I convince myself that our population is FUCKED.

    HE KILLED HER FULL STOP.

    Unbelievable.

  17. ken il malti says:

    And she is still going on about that Romeo and Juliet thing.

    http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20140420/opinion/Was-the-writing-on-the-wall-.515609

    • Susan says:

      You can’t expect better from someone who thinks her own self-induced disastrous personal life is a tale of star-crossed lovers.

Leave a Comment