Reply
Fri 28 Oct, 2005 10:07 pm
Here is
the story of an elderly man knocked down by a drunk.
Was he driving? No, he was walking /stumbling on the sidewalk. The old gent was bumped and hit his head. Subsequently, he died in hospital.
Was this drunk arrested? No.
There doesn't seem to be much justice here.
No sense in making an arrest, if an arrest was made on this then what about the thousands of other arrests which would be needed? People bump into people all the time and people fall and become injured due to these bumpings. How would the reaction be different if the elderly gent had been bumped into by a 30 year old person who was temporarily disoriented due to a prescribed medication? Arrest the doctor or the pharmaceutical company or even the 30 year old? It is unfortunate that the man hit his head and died but now I need to ask, what if he had fallen and not sustained any injury? Would anyone have given a damned then?
Just a thought. The issue of "arrest" isn't important. Arrest is just a function to ensure someone faces a court. The question should be, "why wasn't he charged with manslaughter?"
So why wasn't the drunk charged?
Generally speaking in a manslaughter charge it's necessary to prove some form of mental intent or mens rea - in my jurisdiction recklessness and negligence are sufficient for a prima facie case.
A bumps into B and B falls over and strikes his head on the footpath and dies of a cerebral haemorrhage.
Should A be convicted of manslaughter if he was reading the paper and bumped into B?
Should A be convicted of manslaughter if he was drunk and bumped into B?
Sturgis & goodfielder,
Thanks for your reponses. Perhaps an arrest isn't the right course of action, but like GF says, should the drunk be charged with "something"?
If not manslaughter, I think there should have been some sort of responsibility pinned on the individual.
Yes, alcoholism is considered a disease, but one should not escape responsibility for one's actions.
At the very least, the person should have had to go through mandatory treatment and had a probationary period to ensure that he wasn't going to re-offend being drunk publicly.
Do the same thing with a car and your ass is in stir.
Hello Edgar. Yes, the article makes that distinction as well. It's a whole different scenario.
Even though no car was involved, I still feel some statement of responsibility needs to be pinned on the offender.