A hits V in head at bar. V was dragged outside bar. Later people say he needs medical attention. B and C head towards hospital with V but drop him off in a field. Several hours later V is discovered. V dies but ME stated that if V had medical treatment earlier because it was a slow bleed he probably would have survived. Know there is no duty to get medical attention, but did B and C perform an act that is reckless or negligent that contributed to his death? Think 38.171 is definitely a possibility, but is there anything else?
or manslaughter, but you lack the causation element. Felony stupid is about all I can come up with, other than 38.171.
Now - going way out there - have you thought of kidnapping? He was abducted, in the sense that he was secreted in a place not likely to be found (by dumping him in a field - I assume he was unresponsive and unable to get away). Under 20.03, of course, there is an affirmative defense for no deadly force or threat of the same. Then there is the argument over whether dumping him in the field was deadly force, under the circumstance.
Yes, that's way out there. But this just isn't right, and a class A misdemeanor isn't enough.
Where are the big brains on this?
They knew that he needed medical attention. Didn't they, by taking him from the bar and leaving him in a field, not only fail to get help for him but also overtly put him in a position where nobody else could help him either? In a way, that kind of remind's me of Alpert's old windshield case. At least in the failure to get help aspect of it.
Yep, kidnapping is worth looking at.
Thanks for the help - the windshield case came to mind but she caused the accident. I am looking at kidnapping to see if it works. I think 20.03 might work but because of the definitions of restrain and abduct it might be difficult to show since V was unconscious.
[This message was edited by pkdyer on 07-26-11 at .]
Similar case here a few years ago which resulted in a very innovative charging and prosecution. Wish I had thought of it, but a homicide detective scoured the PC and came up with it.
1. Victim is "disabled" as defined under 22.04(c)(3) due to his injury.
2. The defendants assumed the disabled victim's care by beginning to transport him to the hospital. 22.04(b)(2) and 22.04(d)
3. The defendants omission (not getting the disabled victim to the hospital) resulted in a serious bodily injury (to say the least) under 22.04(a)(1).
4. This innovative charging results in a first degree if intentionally or knowingly committed; or a second degree if recklessly committed, per 22.04(e)
Best of luck to you.
Thanks. This may be exactly what we are looking for.
|Powered by Social Strata|
© TDCAA, 2001. All Rights Reserved.