3 ms·
> The caller is certainly an asshole and is even culpable for homicidal intent, but I don't think that their conduct is tantamount to murder - more like involun
by lj3 9y ago
> The caller is certainly an asshole and is even culpable for homicidal intent, but I don't think that their conduct is tantamount to murder - more like involuntary manslaughter.
The difference between second degree murder and manslaughter is intent. If he's culpable for "homicidal intent" then he's committed murder.
- jMyles 9y agoProbably better was for me to phrase is as "criminal negligence" I suppose. But to me it's more like in the legal category of assisted suicide (which has clear intent to kill, but is charged as manslaughter): The person played an "assistive" role in ensuring that the circumstances for homicide came to pass, did not themselves make the decisions that led to the homicide. In the case of assisted suicide, the actual perpetrator is the patient (whom, to my eyes, has committed to affront to justice) while, in this case, the actual perpetrator is the police officer. In both cases, the "assistant" is culpable for some form of manslaughter, but not murder.
- Natsu 9y agoAssuming the SWAT call itself was a felony, there's something called 'felony murder' which could apply here. The way felony murder works is essentially that if you commit a felony and someone is killed as a result, you're on the hook for that murder.