Woman charged with causing fatal I-95 crash put on suicide watch
STAMFORD -- A Superior Court judge on Monday set bond at $35,000 for the Hartford woman accused of causing a crash that killed two people over the weekend on Interstate 95 in Darien.
Yadira Torres, 26, of 100 Benton St., Hartford, was put on suicide watch after her arraignment at state Superior Court in Stamford, where she faces two counts of second-degree manslaughter and single charges of reckless driving and driving under the influence of alcohol. Around 6 a.m. Saturday she was driving a rented 2010 Dodge Caliber SXT north on I-95 when she tried to pass a tractor-trailer but lost control and hit it, according to a State Police accident report. (ctpost.com)
The most interesting thing is that the prosecutor argued that the defendant is a flight risk in large part based on her being "distraught" over what happened:
Before the ruling Assistant State's Attorney David Applegate argued Torres was a flight-risk.
"The defendant does pose a flight risk due to the serious charges and the anxiety that attorney Crosland has pointed out," Applegate said, referring to earlier remarks from Crosland that detailed his client's distraught state of mind over the fatal crash.
Is killing yourself the same as flight from justice?
In response to an article describing a particularly spectacular suicide, that is, a leap from the world's tallest building, one commenter asserts:
The man surely needed psychological help. Sane people do not commit suicide unless they're evading public humiliation & arrest (avoiding justice).
The commenter implicitly accepts a dichotomy: suicide is either the result of insanity, or a moral wrong.
Seemingly sane people commit suicide all the time in order to avoid "public humiliation & arrest" or other forms of social death. It is impossible to maintain the conviction that only insane people commit suicide when the plain evidence is to the contrary: sane people frequently commit suicide for completely understandable reasons.
People who commit certain actions must suffer the socially-imposed consequences we deem appropriate. We chase them down if they run away. We lock them up. We force them to participate in our reality.
For the good of whom, though? Certainly not their own. The good of the victims, perhaps - if any remain - although it must be an ambivalent and diffuse sort of "good," in that case.
Perhaps it is for the good of the future victims of similar actions. If people knew they could just commit suicide instantly and painlessly at any moment - like switching a computer game off - would that be incredibly dangerous? Would people commit massively antisocial acts knowing they can always unplug if shit gets too real?
I think they might. And I think this shows us something very important about existence:
In actual, real-life decisions that we can observe, people do seem to choose death over negative social consequences.
This demonstrates that life is inherently less valuable, to individuals, than avoiding social pain.
It puts an upper bound on the value of the so-called precious gift of life.