4 ms·
Yeah, he's certainly guilty of creating the circumstances. But to what extent would the outcome have to be predictable? I'm curious... Also shouldn't this pra
by jopsen 9y ago
Yeah, he's certainly guilty of creating the circumstances.
But to what extent would the outcome have to be predictable?
I'm curious...
Also shouldn't this prankster benefit from a presumption of regularity? Otherwise, don't we conclude that it's is regular for the police to shoot innocent people in stressful situations. Which seems like an irregular thing..
I'm obviously not lawyer, so maybe this is too smart, but if the police benefits from a presumption of regularity, shouldn't they prankster calling them also benefit from the presumption that the police acts _regularly_?
And what happens if that presumption erodes...
- roel_v 9y agoDid you google 'eggshell skull'? Because it clearly shows that legal doctrine, across many legal systems, has said for decades that no, there is no 'presumption of regularity' (at least not in the form you're hinting at here - there is a strict other definition in some legal systems which is of no relevance here). And of course, as I said above this doesn't apply directly here because eggshell skull is about the expectation of physical frailty of a person, but similar doctrines exist for other situations.
- jopsen 9y agoFair point... I should have googled that. Certainly makes sense..