So, you've got a woman in your trunk huh?

[caufield]

Here's a hypothetical, let's see what you guys think....

I'm walking down the road and I pass a woman in a Lotus. I've always wanted to drive one so I go up to her as she's parking in front of her house. I knock her to the ground, and I put her in the trunk.

I'm enjoying the car, driving around. I feel like going to dinner, so I pick up my girlfriend. She gets in, and hears the woman in the trunk, "what's in your trunk?" I don't answer the question. "Is there a person in your trunk?" I say "yes" She is confused, but does nothing.

We go through the drivethru, and go to a park to eat. The woman is still in the trunk, screaming and banging. We get back in the car, and I drive to a 7-11 for some cigarettes. I also use the bathroom.

I get back in the car, and we go to a movie. When we get back to the car, we can't hear the woman anymore. I take my girlfriend home. I get pulled over by the cops, and they find the body. I get arrested and they find a witness who puts my girlfriend in the car while the body was inside. Apparently, she drank the window washing fluid and died. I get charged for Murder, and so does she.

Do we both go to jail? Why?

[Sean]

you fuckin weird dude.

you fit right in here.

and you both go to jail...

you for murder, and the gf as an accomplice to murder.

[caufield]

just to put a little perspective on this, this is a hypothetical from Criminal law. I'm weird, but not too weird. I'm just in law school. The law is really weird.

[JakeD]

Here's a hypothetical, let's see what you guys think....

I'm walking down the road and I pass a woman in a Lotus. I've always wanted to drive one so I go up to her as she's parking in front of her house. I knock her to the ground, and I put her in the trunk.

I'm enjoying the car, driving around. I feel like going to dinner, so I pick up my girlfriend. She gets in, and hears the woman in the trunk, "what's in your trunk?" I don't answer the question. "Is there a person in your trunk?" I say "yes" She is confused, but does nothing.

We go through the drivethru, and go to a park to eat. The woman is still in the trunk, screaming and banging. We get back in the car, and I drive to a 7-11 for some cigarettes. I also use the bathroom.

I get back in the car, and we go to a movie. When we get back to the car, we can't hear the woman anymore. I take my girlfriend home. I get pulled over by the cops, and they find the body. I get arrested and they find a witness who puts my girlfriend in the car while the body was inside. Apparently, she drank the window washing fluid and died. I get charged for Murder, and so does she.

Do we both go to jail? Why?

Cat? Run. Run hard. Run like the fucking wind, because his dognipplecocks will FIND YOU.

Regardless, I think the girlfriend should be culpable for not reporting the screaming fucking human being in the trunk of your freshly-stolen car. You should be blamed accordingly, but she should be considered an accomplice.

[caufield]

sorry sean

[trekbugging]

my take on law would be you would be charged with murder 1-- gf would be charged as accomplish in homiside

do i win the kewpie doll?

[Bones]

Caufield, if your gonna steal cars , don't get Kitty involved. You weird evil man.

[thestarsfall]

It wouldn't be murder 1, cuz its not like you were stalking her beforehand and planned out how to kill her. In all technicality you didn't kill her. I think you and your gf would be charged with kidnapping and reckless endangerment or something similar. I would assume the lawyers would want to charge you for 2nd degree murder or whatever, but a good defense attorney should be able to get that dropped.

but then, what would I know...it's not like that has ever happened to me...

...and I have no background in law anyway

[JakeD]

In all technicality you didn't kill her.

Yeah, I didn't factor that in when first skimming it over. Not sure how to make the call with that tidbit in mind.

[Unforgiven]

Do we both go to jail? Why?

Legally? Beats me.

Ethically? Hell yes. If she knew the woman was in the trunk, she should be charged just the same.


If I load a gun, hand it to you and tell you to shoot a guy, and you do, am I not guilty of killing the victim as well? Again, I'm not a lawyer, but I know what I think of it, ethically.

[JakeD]

After thinking about this, I worry that charging someone for non-intervention could be a slippery slope. I totally understand it in this case, as this is a very clear-cut example of when someone should be legally responsible for not(at least) notifying the authorities.

Also every time I see this thread title I automatically think "caufield, get the fuck away from my car! Go home and leave us...uh...me be!"

[thestarsfall]

I think they would both go to jail if convicted of the crimes I said....but the gf would only be an accessory and didn't participate in the actual kidnapping of the woman so I am sure a good lawyer could get her off a longer sentence in favour of shorter time or higher chance of parole or something...but then again...I have no idea...

[kittyroze]

/me suggests to Caufield that he shouldn't write his hypotheticals in the first person.

So,the woman died from drinking window washing fluid, and not from being in the trunk of a car? I think she's the stupid one here.

[Beat_Criminal]

How do I find a girlfriend that will let me keep other women in the trunk? I honestly think that the girlfriend would get charged with neglegent homicide rather than as an accomplice. She didn't assist in the act or planning of hitting the woman and stuffing her in the truck, she just didn't do anything about it. But I am not a lawyer nor have I ever stuffed a woman on the trunk of my car while I run errands just cause I "got shit to do".

-B

[Unforgiven]

How do I find a girlfriend that will let me keep other women in the trunk?
-B

If I knew that, I wouldn't be single.

[James]

The woman drinking window washing fliud instead of doing something productive to escape is a perfect example of why we should have dangerous playgrounds for kids. All the stupid people will die off before anyone grows that attached to them.

[caufield]

Well, here's the thing. I would be guilty of murder. My girlfriend would walk away, completely innocent. The woman died because of my actions during a car jacking. The girlfriend did nothing wrong. In all but two states in the US. If you see someone dying on the ground, you don't have to do anything to help them.

There are two states with good samaritan laws, Minnesota and Vermont. So if you're skiing in Vermont and see someone hit a tree, you need to help. You're in line at the DMV and someone has a heart attack in California, you can take their number to move up higher in line.

In fact, if you do decide to help someone, and something goes wrong? Like performing the heimlich on someone and you break a rib? They can sue you. What a country.

[Bones]

Well, here's the thing. I would be guilty of murder. My girlfriend would walk away, completely innocent.

Dude, I think we went over this in a thread before. Texas will mainline you if you are involved.

[thestarsfall]

The woman drinking window washing fliud instead of doing something productive to escape is a perfect example of why we should have dangerous playgrounds for kids. All the stupid people will die off before anyone grows that attached to them.
If you are locked in a trunk you are supposed to find the wires that put the blinkers on and then pull on them or something (i forget) and then you get pulled over by the police because your blinkers are either going bonkers or don't work, or your taillights dont work...so yeah...drinking windowwashing fluid is stupid...she obviously had suicidal tendencies.



In fact, if you do decide to help someone, and something goes wrong? Like performing the heimlich on someone and you break a rib? They can sue you. What a country.Which is why you have to get consent to help someone. And if they are unconscious then its implied consent. Even paramedics have to get consent to help someone. I watched this show were the woman took all her pills and downed them with hard liquor and the producer called 911 and the lady refused help so the paramedics had to wait til she passed out until they could help.

[Unforgiven]

The woman drinking window washing fliud instead of doing something productive to escape is a perfect example of why we should have dangerous playgrounds for kids. All the stupid people will die off before anyone grows that attached to them.


They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into , I say, let 'em crash!

[Amaurote]

Well, here's the thing. I would be guilty of murder. My girlfriend would walk away, completely innocent.

Even though she rode knowingly in a stolen car and made no attempt to immediately exit?

Even taking into account the principle that a third party did not actively steal, kidnap or murder, I imagine a good lawyer could construct some kind of case - this isn't a simple question of non-intervention where someone sees a crime and does nothing; it's more analogous to sitting on a coffin knowing there is a woman very short of breath just inside. If you can prove that that person helped contribute to a set of conditions that aggravated the primary criminal into extending the kidnapping (going on a date, going to a drive-in, driving through the woods) ordeal, I wonder if a charge of aiding and abetting would really be completely out of the question.

[caufield]

In California, this wouldn't be a crime. She had no obligation to help someone. There may be other laws in other states, and in Texas, you don't really need to do anything wrong to get sentenced to death in Texas. That's probably an exaggeration.....maybe....And about riding around in a stolen car? She didn't know it was stolen.

[kittyroze]

Despite the risk of being sued, if I see someone in immediate physical danger, I'll at least call 911. Or perform the heimlich. Or whatever.I'd rather help than not, even if that means I'll get sued. What are they going to sue me for? The most expensive thing I out and out own is probably this laptop. Wait, my laptop? They can't have my laptop. This is my baby. Fuck the injured person, they can just die in a pool of their own blood.

Preeeeccciiiiooooouuuuussss.

[Poseidon]

Despite the risk of being sued, if I see someone in immediate physical danger, I'll at least call 911. Or perform the heimlich. Or whatever.I'd rather help than not, even if that means I'll get sued. What are they going to sue me for? The most expensive thing I out and out own is probably this laptop. Wait, my laptop? They can't have my laptop. This is my baby. Fuck the injured person, they can just die in a pool of their own blood.

Preeeeccciiiiooooouuuuussss.

Unless you are a trained paramedic, you can't be sued due to "good samaritan" clauses

[caufield]

I wouldn't be too surprised if someone put the lawsuit on you. You can virtually be sued for anything that happens to you no matter what. If you're not trained, you could be charged for something along the lines of practicing medicine without training. You're obligated to help if you're a paramedic or a nurse or a doctor, that much is true. I'm sure if someone wanted to sue you for helping them, they could. There have been cases in California (so sayeth the law professor) where these things would happen. The law is a mysterious thing. There may be laws in other states that deal with this sort of stuff i.e. protecting the good samaritan, but you can be sued for being a good samaritan in California. It all has to do with the judge in a summary judgement, on appeal, or a jury.

This isn't coming from me. I'm not a trained lawyer. This is all from my criminal law professor. It was a hypothetical in my book. I'm not an authority. Crazy things happen when cases aren't appealed.

To a certain extent, if you harm a person while you're trying to save them? That could be assault. You harmed a person without their permission for you to act. It could be said that you aren't licensed to practice medicine if you're not trained to do so. If you're trained, you have to help them, and you still could be held liable for any injuries. If you do permanent damage to them while trying to save them, you can definitely be sued.

If anyone else is curious about some of the stranger cases, I'll gladly help. Some of them are really funny, disturbing, frustrating, and jaw dropping.

[thestarsfall]

I was taught, when I was certified for First Aid, that:
1. we do not HAVE to help
2. we must first ask permission, and you even have to ask if they are unconscious...you have to like shake them a bit and go "are you alright, can you hear me, may i help you?"
3. you are protected (at least in canada) under the good Samaritan law and as long as you ask permission or they were unconscious you can't be sued if you break their ribs or something...

and since I have a license for first aid it's not like l would be charged with practicing medicine without a license or something stupid like that..

[caufield]

Exactly! The thing is, when you're helping a person, you voluntarily took responsibility for that person's life. If you initiate life saving measures, you must either help the person back to life, or they have to die. If you stop doing anything, and you haven't differed responsibility onto another person, and the person dies, you are responsible for their death. This is because there are a few parameters when it comes to obligation to help:

First: If there is a statute telling you you have to do something. To the knowledge of my professor, there isn't one in California.

Second: if there is a relationship to the person. At least in California, the relationship is parent chid, or spouse to spouse. If you really don't like your brother, and he falls off a bridge and is dying on the ground below. You could just walk away.

There was an example about a pit bull running after your niece. If you decide to slam the door on your niece's face, it isn't your pit bull, and she dies, you're not criminally liable for anything.

Third: If there is a contractual obligation. This might be a situation with a first aid certificate, or a CPR certificate. Technically it could be a paramedic or a doctor but I'm pretty sure there are laws that cover medical professionals.

Fourth: If you voluntarily take responsibility for a person. This would be a situation like a child who you invited into your house and their parents weren't there, and she drowns in your pool. You've liable. If it's an adult you invited into your house, you're not liable. If you're performing the heimlich maneuver, and you say, "eh fuck it", you stop, and they die, you are liable for their death

Fifth: If you have put the person in immediate danger. If it had been your pit bull running after your niece, you are liable. If you accidentally shoot someone, and you let them die, you're liable. Also, you don't have to put your life at risk to save them from a burning car, or climbing down a cliff.

If you are not under any of these circumstances to a dying person, you could just walk away. That's the thing with the girlfriend. She didn't put the woman in the trunk, the boyfriend did nor did she stop the woman from escaping. The stolen car could be a different story. There could be away for a prosecutor to tie her to the theft, but it would be difficult if there were no witnesses putting her at the scene.

All that we know about the girlfriend is that she was in the car and heard the woman. She also didn't have the obligation to report the car stolen if she knew it had been stolen. In California, you don't have the obligation to report a crime. You could watch a person rob a bank, wait till they leave, and continue waiting in line to make your deposit.

What is important is that these situations are all made possible by the laws that are made in legislation by the rulings by judges in appellate situations. If you're horrified by these situations, they can be changed. You could make it a crime to be in a car with a dying person and not go for help. The law is the law. However, the law can be changed.

[Amaurote]

In California, this wouldn't be a crime. She had no obligation to help someone.

Like I say, I think the key distinction here would be between passively not helping and actively contributing to aggravating the length of the ordeal by prolonging her presence in the car (boyfriend tries to impress her, drives her to other places to impress her, drives aggressively to impress her, etc., etc.), which in turn led to the woman's death. I'd be surprised if a decent lawyer couldn't use that to establish responsibility and secure a conviction of some kind, whatever the state statutes say to the contrary.

[caufield]

The issue is not necessarily making a conviction, the issue is getting it through the appeals process. A jury could convict on nearly anything, but an appeals court can look at a verdict, and decide if the jury was incorrect in making that determination. In texas, she might be dead. Then again, that's texas. A good prosecutor up against a shitty attorney could probably get a conviction. But under the letter of the law, she didn't do anything to help kill the woman.

The problem is our feeling of morality. This situation is a situation that is usually used by the media and by politicians as a rallying cry for change. It is grossly immoral, but then again, when is immoral illegal? At the same time, are there morals that you would want a law to enforce? Even then, there are holes. The appeals process is there if there is a gross misinterpretation of the law.

Even though much of our system is based off of the common law system of England, we've messed it up in our own little ways in the name of freedom. What this has brought and what this means is all of our own doing. Remember, this is legal, until we say it is illegal.

[James]

Regarding Ontario First aiders not being obligated to help, this is true of normal people, but not trueif you are certified as being able to help. I've been told this several times after taking St Johns Ambulance training in school and in the Military. Obviously, there is the loophole that you "did not feel qualified" at the moment to help and you were panicking or whatever. But all my instructors specifically said: "technically you have to do CPR even if the head is cut right off except for a tiny flap of skin holding it all together, though obviously you aren't going to". It's a silly technicality that is in place for an obvious reason: so first aiders dont declare someone dead mistakenly when it's in a "grey area". this rule makes the extent of the grey area "does a tendon count as a connection?" or whatever.
But the great thing is that "free" insurance that covers first aid lawsuits is automatically given to anyone who is certified in first aid. So you can feel safe knowing that if you save someones life, they can sue you and give you a cut afterwards.

[Bones]

There was an example about a pit bull running after your niece. If you decide to slam the door on your niece's face, it isn't your pit bull, and she dies, you're not criminally liable for anything.

What if the pit bull is running from my niece and I slam the door in my pit bulls face and she kills him?

[thestarsfall]

Regarding Ontario First aiders not being obligated to help, this is true of normal people, but not trueif you are certified as being able to help. I've been told this several times after taking St Johns Ambulance training in school and in the Military. Obviously, there is the loophole that you "did not feel qualified" at the moment to help and you were panicking or whatever. But all my instructors specifically said: "technically you have to do CPR even if the head is cut right off except for a tiny flap of skin holding it all together, though obviously you aren't going to". It's a silly technicality that is in place for an obvious reason: so first aiders dont declare someone dead mistakenly when it's in a "grey area". this rule makes the extent of the grey area "does a tendon count as a connection?" or whatever.
But the great thing is that "free" insurance that covers first aid lawsuits is automatically given to anyone who is certified in first aid. So you can feel safe knowing that if you save someones life, they can sue you and give you a cut afterwards.
Our instructor said that we don't HAVE to help ever. She hoped that we would help when we can, but we are not under obligation to help. It's not like they will search the crowd and ask if anyone had a license and then sue the person or lock them up or something.

[caufield]

poor pit bull. If that ever happens bones, you can kill the child. If you mount the head outside you house, they will never come back, and you pit bulls will be safe

[thestarsfall]

i think the banning of pitbulls is the stupidest decision in the world...

its like banning swimming because people drowned...

actually its nothing like that, i just want to point out its stupid

[Bones]

poor pit bull. If that ever happens bones, you can kill the child. If you mount the head outside you house, they will never come back, and you pit bulls will be safe

Fuck that!! I'm scared of my niece. She makes the kid from The Omen look friendly.

[Bassmama]

Well, tell your criminal law professor that I think he needs tocheck his facts, because NY is also a 'good samaritan' law state.If I come upon an accident & stop to help, I cannot be sued unless I knowingly & willingly do something harmful to someone. (Like finding out my ex is in the accident & smothering his ass. Hey- I can dream!!)

Or if I 'accidently' run him over 3 or 4 times...

[caufield]

hmmm...interesting. I will ask him. There is definitely not one in California. Didn't the Kitty 38 witnesses story happen in NYC? Where the woman was stabbed repeatedly and no one reported it? Do you have to do something if you come upon an accident, as in, you have to do something? Or does it protect you from being sued? The obligation to help is what he was talking about. In Vermont and Minnesota, supposedly, you have to do something.

[Bassmama]

Yes, Kitty Genovese was murdered in New York City in 1967 (http://www.newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ny-history-hs818a,0,7944135.story).

As far as I know, there is NO law saying that anyone HAS to stop if they come upon an accident or help in any way, but there IS a law that protects people that do stop from being sued because they tried to help victims. People that don't have training to do certain things should not attempt to do them, but leave them for trained personnell to do. For instance, my ex was a paramedic & I was an advanced EMT & we were coming around a corner & came upon a rollover that had just happened & the woman was still in the car hanging upside down by her seatbelt. She had no obvious bleeding, she was alert & coherant, & after asking her all the questions checking her status & reaching in to check her pulse regularly, we left her hanging upside down- there was NO way we could get her out without potentially causing head/spinal injury, there were people directing traffic so we were all safe that way, there was no risk of fire/explosion, & the fire dept. was on it's way, so all we COULD do is stay with her & talk to her until help got there, which is what we did.

On the other hand, I came upon the same situation years before where a woman had been hanging in her seatbelt after a rollover & right before I got there, a man crawled into the car & cut the seatbelt & dropped her down- and caused a head injury & neck injury while doing it- then left as I arrived after gleefully telling me about how he cut her out of the seatbelt. Luckily, she was OK after she got through about a week in the hosp. from her concussion & neck injury. (She wrote me a letter.)

If we had NOT stopped, we would not have been in trouble, but I would not have been able to live with myself. I looked for a purpose for my life for MANY years & finally decided that I am here to help others when I can. BTW- 3 people are walking around out there right now because of me- I directly was responsible for saving them, mostly because I knew what to do when I came upon the accidents.

[caufield]

YAY! I may seem rather blood thirsty, I just think people should know this stuff just in case they're in a situation so they have a small idea of what to do. It's also a good way for people to see a horrible interpretation of a law to see that they'd like to change it. JakeD saved a guy too. I haven't had the opportunity, but I'd like to think I'd help to the best of my ability.

[Bones]

YAY! I may seem rather blood thirsty

Being blood thirsty has its good points. Especially if you are a vampire or werewolf.

[thestarsfall]

Caufield I think the confusion was you previously stated in a confusing way that the good samaritan law was about obligation to help or something like that (I may have just read it wrong) when in actuality the good samaritan law is that if you help (and are qualified) they can't sue you if you do damage while helping them.

[Bones]

i think the banning of pitbulls is the stupidest decision in the world...

its like banning swimming because people drowned...

actually its nothing like that, i just want to point out its stupid

You rock!!! My pit bull tells me you do. Wait... He retarded. Fuck it. You rock any way.:p

[caufield]

I can definitely see it that way Twitch. I'm sorry. I'll try and be more clear. You guys were following what I wrote very well. Too bad I suck!

[Bones]

I can definitely see it that way Twitch. I'm sorry. I'll try and be more clear. You guys were following what I wrote very well. Too bad I suck!

Dude. You were very clear. You don't suck. Never think that you do. One day you are going to be a kick ass lawyer.
Now that I'm done with being nice, I'll go back to harassing you.

[JakeD]

I'll take over from here.

Goddammit, caufield, do you even speak English?

:p


JakeD saved a guy too. I haven't had the opportunity, but I'd like to think I'd help to the best of my ability.

Also, all I did was call the cops. I still don't know what happened to the guy, and I could have been the catalyst for a bunch of bad shit in his life. I still hope that my actions after seeing someone who was obviously vagrant and bleeding on the sidewalk did something to help.

[caufield]

I tAlk PteTy Sumday