cause harm to or by another but chooses to act/speak anyway?
For instance, someone who was aware that another person was mentally unstable and fed into their belief that another person was the devil, leading to the mentally ill person murdering the third party? Thanks.
2006-11-18 10:24:02 · 5 answers · asked by tagi_65 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
There are multiple possible standards.
Criminal negligence is where the person was responsible for stopping the criminal, and failed to exercise due care in doing so. This only applies where the person owed a legal duty to act.
Reckless endangerment is where the person had a legal duty to act or at least a duty to reduce the risk of harm, and choose to either not act or to disregard that risk of harm. The difference is that negligence is an objective standard (what they should have done), while recklessness involves a subjectively known duty/risk.
Criminal facilitation (accomplice liability) is where the person knew they were helping the criminal commit the crime, and helped them anyway.
2006-11-18 11:15:12 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Accessory to Murder, if the person is truly mentally ill they may end up with a lighter sentence than the person who caused them to do the crime.
2006-11-18 10:47:18 · answer #2 · answered by daydoom 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Murder first degree
2006-11-18 10:39:13 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
contributing to the delinquency,
coercion,
conspiracy.
2006-11-18 10:37:49 · answer #4 · answered by barrbou214 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
cohesion?
2006-11-18 10:37:53 · answer #5 · answered by punkin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋