20 years ago, a poor girl was being bullied and beaten mercilessly by this brat son of a rich man. She got so bullied to the extent that this kid was threatened that if she doesn't die, people around her will start dying until she eventually kills herself. Being a school girl, she succumbs and does kill herself. The autopsy report relates that it was suicide but the parents would not have it and therefore get the police to investigate. The police stumbles across the bullying but with the kid being the son of a rich man, some details were ignored and some files hidden and investigation went cold. Now the man has changed his ways having grown to be a star but lavished his money, he became a teacher and a Christian. The sister of the suicide victims falls for him.

One of the men in the police force was retiring and decided to enlighten the family about what had been covered up. Turns out that there was a suicide note written by the victim before taking her life and in there implicating the gentleman on all he had been doing and the latest threats she had receive including notes and pictures of what had been done to her. The family is now trying to pursue a case against the gentleman but have no idea how to go about it as it is been regarded as suicide. My question is surely if someone can be convicted of manslaughter by being present during the act or of being an accomplice during a rapist attack, why can this gentleman also not be convicted of manslaughter? lawyers in the house please fell free to advice using as many legal jargons as possible.