Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

IAmTiborius OP t1_je91u4r wrote

The gunman, John Hinckley Jr., did not face charges for Brady's death because he had been found not guilty of the shooting by reason of insanity. In addition, since Brady's death occured more than 33 years after the shooting, the prosecution of Hinckley was barred under the year and a day law in effect in the District of Columbia at the time of the shooting. Hinckley was released from institutional psychiatric care on September 10, 2016

345

doterobcn t1_je92b3f wrote

It makes no sense.
Suppose during a basketball game in high school, I got injured after someone pushed me, which resulted in a problem with my leg or knee, making me walk awkwardly. Twenty-five years later, I tripped and fell face-first on something that killed me, which was caused by my knee problem. Would the person who pushed me during the basketball game be held responsible for my injury and ultimately, my death?

49

Aelok t1_je94riq wrote

I think in this case it's more of a distinction of the type of death, not assigning blame. OP posted some details that the shooter wasn't charged because at the time of the original shooting he successfully pleaded insanity to all charges, including the homicide death that resulted years later.

Still odd, never heard of something like this before.

1

AdmiralAkbar1 t1_je95ly8 wrote

It largely depends on the circumstances of the original act. For instance, shooting someone under any circumstance is a very serious crime. Even if wasn't an immediately fatal injury, and it was totally by accident, there are still numerous charges that you would net: assault with a deadly weapon, criminal negligence, and so on. Some states even have laws on the books which allow cases that may not normally be considered murders to be treated as such—for example, the concept of "felony murder," where if you commit a felony that directly results in someone's death, even if you did not intend for it to happen, you could still be charged with murder.

Also, it depends on the circumstances of the death. It wasn't as if Brady had died in an unrelated incident that may have been exacerbated by his condition, he died as a direct result of the condition and the toll it had on its body. A more fitting analogy would be is if someone deliberately pushed you off a high ledge, you broke your spine, and you died 25 years later because of your paralysis.

59

hoarder59 t1_je9d0ak wrote

Look at Charles Whitmans victims. David Gunby was shot in 1966 and died in 2001. Ruled a homicide because, despite living for decades with the injury, it ultimately caused his death.

124

cindblank t1_je9in53 wrote

On a death certificate there is a Part 1 line for immediate cause of death and under that is "Due to as a consequence of" line. There is also a Part 2 section "Significant conditions contributing to death but not related to cause given in Part 1."

Most certainly the shooting did contribute to his untimely death, but I believe the determination by the coroner was made to be sure that maximum benefits could be awarded to the family.

Another example I know of was a war veteran that committed suicide. The conditions that contributed to his actions was his chronic pain and multiple surgeries he endured from injuries he received by serving during war. Without the second line, his widow would not have received monthly benefits.

64

rickymourke82 t1_je9og98 wrote

Not even close to the same thing. Brady was one step above a vegetable the rest of his life after being shot. It was a long, slow death and not hard to say the death was ultimately connected to his being shot. Are we really dumbed down to the point people compare being shot and suffering the rest of your life to being pushed in basketball and rolling an ankle?

12

OmegaZodiac t1_je9ok2z wrote

This is pretty common when a medical examiner is making a determination on the manner of death. The main question is if the person returned to the same quality of life afterwards or if the incident caused lifelong effects.

Most commonly if a person is severely injured in a car accident and has lingering complications. They may die 20 years later naturally in their sleep but it could be ruled "accidental" rather than "natural" and a line on cause may include "complications due to motor vehicle accident".

I had one where a guy was shot in the head in the 90s and lived with lingering headaches. That was enough that it required an autopsy to determine if it was the bullet still in his head that contributed to his death.

13

Either_Difficulty851 t1_je9qz65 wrote

Listing the cause of death for a death certificate and criminal culpability for causing the death are two entirely distinct things.

12

wubbadubba t1_je9srsa wrote

I remember the assassination attempt. Tv news played it over and over again, "if you are just tuning in, Buckwheat has been shot"

0

mk09 t1_je9tcov wrote

No, because the person who pushed you didn't intend to commit murder and the knee injury wasn't the proximate cause of death. The person who tried to assassinate Reagan did have that intent and injuries from the shooting proximately caused Brady's death, so it was a homicide.

33

LoverlyRails t1_je9waoi wrote

I've seen it ruled as homicide as well, when the victim of shaken baby syndrome dies of their injuries after a consider length of time. Sometimes years/decades later.

They died from their injuries caused by the act- it just was really slow at killing them.

1

ColonelKasteen t1_je9yfcg wrote

Did they push you with the intent to kill you? No. If you trip and fall and break your neck, is your bad knee the primary cause of death? No, accidenfal falling is. You can fall without a bad knee. The bad knee is at most a contributing factor.

Your hypothetical shares none of the key factors here

1

TaliesinMerlin t1_jea1rx4 wrote

>Would the person who pushed me during the basketball game be held responsible for my injury and ultimately, my death?

Probably not, since that would be an accident and the player wasn't attempting to commit a crime. (They were committing a foul.)

6

arbivark t1_jea31ww wrote

I don't know, but it made me think of a case from torts class.

In 1891, the Wisconsin Supreme Court came to a similar result in Vosburg v. Putney.[10] In that case, a boy kicked another from across the aisle in the classroom. It turned out that the victim had an unknown microbial condition that was irritated, and resulted in him entirely losing the use of his leg. No one could have predicted the level of injury. Nevertheless, the court found that the kicking was unlawful because it violated the "order and decorum of the classroom", and the perpetrator was therefore fully liable for the injury.

here, the death is labeled a homicide, the source being two newspapers that are behind adwalls. but homicide here is not the same as chargeable as homicide, because the death was not within a year and a day. i don't remember why the common law rule adds that extra day.

8

Gnarfledarf t1_jea498t wrote

This story is what the Pokémon moves Future Sight and Doom Desire are based on.

−2

FPSHero007 t1_jea64bz wrote

That's some of the worst lag I've ever heard of

2

SNESamus t1_jeam1v7 wrote

Honestly, yes. The man has done his time (35 years), and seems to be legitimately reformed and stable. I probably wouldn't be a fan of his, but I'd be okay with him making something of the rest of his life.

31

jeandanjou t1_jeap51e wrote

If he's regretful, treated and paid his time? Yeah I think so. It didn't show particular signs of cruelties and he was legit insane at the time. Harboring grudges, even if justified, for decades and making it your lifelong mission to keep following and resenting and attacking a person means your life will also be stuck in that day.

Doesn't mean I'm going to personally embrace him and invite him in my house like some people do.

19

danathecount t1_jeaxjop wrote

All executions that happen on death row have 'homicide' listed as the causse for their death certificate.

1

Viperbunny t1_jeb4oxp wrote

My kids recently discovered what a Rick roll was and were so excited to share it. Rick rolling them is at blast. It's pay back for explaining what a meme is to me like I'm ancient just because I am older than Google!

12

renecade24 t1_jebfem2 wrote

That's not entirely accurate. People can be charged with murder when they didn't intend to kill someone under the felony murder rule if the death occurs when they're in the process of committing another felony. In this hypothetical, there's no criminal intent if someone is fouled in a basketball game. Even if the player intended to injure the other player, at most it would likely be a misdemeanor assault, so the felony murder rule wouldn't apply (plus the basketball injury wasn't the proximate cause of the death). Even if the basketball injury did cause the death, if there's insufficient criminal intent to charge the player with murder, then it would be manslaughter and the statute of limitations for manslaughter would have already lapsed by that point.

2

JA_LT99 t1_jebi4ie wrote

The difference is the action taken against you. Pushing is not the same thing as shooting at someone with bodyguards. It would all be part of a larger picture of course, but in the scenario of a baseball game, it could very well be argued that the foreseeable consequences for the pusher did not realistically include death, while that could almost never be assumed about a gun. The Baldwin case being a good example of when that argument could be made, as we assume he honestly believed he was holding a sophisticated and professional prop.

1

themagicbong t1_jebse31 wrote

My dad did air monitoring for stuff like asbestos abatement, and we lived in New York right outside NYC when 9/11 happened. He showed up to help, also took some air samples himself. I definitely vividly recall him telling me that basically everyone who was there absolutely was exposed to ALL KINDS of shit in the air. He still has the hardhat signed by Giuliani somewhere.

15

youhaveausername t1_jebw5ui wrote

My grandpa was shot multiple times in the Korean War and whe he passed, it was a result of one of his stitches coming undone after all those years and he asphyxiated on his blood. Ruled homicide, my grandma got more benefits

1

KGhaleon t1_jebx68d wrote

>In your perfect utopia, would you just execute murderers in the same way
they murdered someone? Would you maybe sentence a rapist to be raped
themselves?

Look at these mental gymnastics.

−3