I was reading a book and came across this situation... a man was poisoned, then as he was dying, someone else shot him.
So who is guilty of murder, the poisoner or the shooter? I have my own theories, but am interested in seeing what others have to say.
2006-07-25 06:24:33 · 13 answers · asked by Balaboo 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Are we assuming the gunshot is what killed the man? If so, then the shooter is guilty of murder; the poisoner is guilty of attempted murder IF poison is found in the autopsy.
As far as I'm concerned, the "killer" that dealt the "death blow" (in this case, the shot) is the party guilty of murder. Others are attempted or accessories. Mainly because you have presented no evidence to suggest that the shooter knew the deceased had been poisoned, thus suggesting that the shooter was attempting to murder the victim, rather than prevent a long, agonizing death (which would still be murder but at least it isn't as cold-blooded).
2006-07-25 06:35:04 · answer #1 · answered by Goose&Tonic 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
The shooter. The poisoner is guilty of attempted murder.
2006-07-25 06:28:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The shooter. The poisoner is guilty of attempted murder.
(That is assuming he died because of the gunshot. The poisoner can't be guilty of murder, because he didn't kill anyone. This is easily understood: the person he poisoned could have recovered, could have been given an antidote (even by the poisoner), etc.)
2006-07-25 06:27:46 · answer #3 · answered by C_Bar 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whomever shot him is guilty. The man that poisoned himself could have been found and rushed to the hospital in time to spare his life, but then on the other hand the same could have happened if he was just shot, someone could have came and saved him. Speaking from a moral standpoint I'd have to say that the shooter would be guilty.
2006-07-25 06:30:13 · answer #4 · answered by Jen 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If I were a judge considering this case...
The actual murderer would be the shooter. Despite being poisoned, the man had not actually died - hence there was a small chance, even the teeniest chance he could have survived.
However for justice to prevail, I would esure both are punished. One for Murder (the shooter) and the other for attempted murder (the poisoner)
Now theres Analytical thinking - Obviously a Leeds Uni Graduate! ;o)
2006-07-25 06:29:21 · answer #5 · answered by Rayan 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
somebody didn't like this guy. both are guilty, legally. however the first who is caught will be most likely the guilty party. this case it would be the shooter. he would be held accountable for the murder unless the poisoner could be found. if not, then the shooter will take the rap.
2006-07-25 06:28:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The shooter killed him, therefore guilty of murder. The poisoner tried and is guilty of attempted murder.
2006-07-25 06:59:45 · answer #7 · answered by rhymingron 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the gunshot caused him to die first then the shooter is responsible for the murder as you can't gurantee he would die from the poison, and even if you could it is the official cause of death that determines who would be charged with murder with the poisoner being chargeable with attempted murder
2006-07-25 06:28:55 · answer #8 · answered by barhud 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That depends on what killed him.
Assuming he died from the gunshot, the shooter is guilty of murder.
The poisoner is guilty of attempted murder.
2006-07-25 06:28:20 · answer #9 · answered by Ricky T 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The shooter, poison can be reversed if treated... poisoner would be guilty of attempted though. Cheers
2006-07-25 06:29:02 · answer #10 · answered by Amy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋