If someone is drowning and you refuse to help, are you responsible for his death?

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cain Tesfaye)
    no it isn't... there is no duty of care among strangers in english law.
    Oh be quiet you.

    And just because there isn't one doesn't mean there shouldn't be.

    It's manslaughter.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0to100)
    And just because there isn't one doesn't mean there shouldn't be.

    It's manslaughter.
    so are you saying it is manslaughter, or that it should be manslaughter? the former is simply false, and the latter irrelevant.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0to100)
    It is manslaughter.

    Accidental death is manslaughter...
    Yes, accidental death that you caused.
    Let's say two people are walking next to a river.
    Scenario 1: They get into an altercation and one ends up accidentally pushing the other into the river; they then drown. Seems like manslaughter to me.
    Scenario 2: One of them falls into the river, with no influence from the other, and drowns; the other does not save them. How is this manslaughter?
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Quite possibly but to complicate this further, what if you have to risk your own life to save that person?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    No you are in no way responible, they are completely at fault for their own death.

    I watched a documentary once where this guy in America jumped into a lake to save this girl, she later sued him for rape ann sexual assault because appartantly he handled her inappropriately when he was bringing her out of the water. He was found guilty and sentenced to 15 years (I think) the girl also got a huge amount of compensation.

    Therefore, after watching this If I seen someone drowning, particularly a women I would not jump in and help. I would try and call for help though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
    Yes, accidental death that you caused.
    Let's say two people are walking next to a river.
    Scenario 1: They get into an altercation and one ends up accidentally pushing the other into the river; they then drown. Seems like manslaughter to me.
    Scenario 2: One of them falls into the river, with no influence from the other, and drowns; the other does not save them. How is this manslaughter?
    Hi btw

    Ok, you did cause it if you are staring at someone die...
    you can't just use logical reasoning and your personal bias to answer this if we're discussing law....

    During prosecution questions will be asked to witnesses and defendant: did you see what happened? Can you swim?

    It's why many people are advised not to stand and make testimony, because of self-incriminating evidence, even if they are presumed innocent by everyone and oneself lol I watch trials and love seeing things unfold like such.


    But on to your scenarios:
    ok well now you're discussing irrelevant stuff....and bringing in details that create completely different scenarios which I never stated were manslaughter.

    Back to this scenario: this is manslaughter, involuntary. Become a lawyer, claim it, and see how you win.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Yes. A similar situation occurred on Orphan Black - a character got their scarf stuck in the disposal unit in their kitchen, and they were being strangled. Alison Hendrix was there during the entire thing, and had easy access to the switch to turn the disposal unit off, but chose not to, and let the other character die. It's the same as in the swimming scenario, and they are responsible for the death because they could've stopped it if they wanted to.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BasicMistake)
    Quite possibly but to complicate this further, what if you have to risk your own life to save that person?
    Then don't. The op didnt bother to detail the scenario.

    If it's like a flood or something, I'm saving my skin and the children in my family. That is it if the risk is incredible.

    If it's just a lake, the pool, the beach, the tub, and someone can't swim, and I'm laying down relaxing and can swim, a lifeguard, a stranger, a friend, and just watch them drown, I would expect the police at my door very soon.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0to100)
    Back to this scenario: this is manslaughter, involuntary. Become a lawyer, claim it, and see how you win.
    very bad advice. to prove causation for an omission:
    It is necessary to prove to the criminal standard that but for the omission the deceased would not have died.
    Source: CPS

    In this scenario, but for X's omission to save Y, Y would (still) have died, thus there is no causation (and therefore no criminal offence).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    HEY!
    How come this character is a "his"? What are you trying to suggest here?
    Spoiler:
    Show

    (this is a joke pls don't eat me thnku)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Depends on the level of help you're talking about.

    If you refuse to call for help, or don't throw a life ring (if one is available), then I suppose it's possible. It'd probably be one of those one off cases tbh.

    If you refuse to swim out? No. Just because you can swim, it doesn't mean it's safe to swim out.
    "Reach or throw, don't go" - The American Red Cross

    Ultimately, it's something that should be done on a case by case basis.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This is why I hate the internet sometimes. Because people find liberty to defend watching someone die. Really, people?

    So if you're relaxing at the beach or the pool or your child is in the tub...

    you're not going to help if someone is dying simply because you did not push them in??

    In fact, why is this even a thread? How is this now a debate?

    That's enough TSR for me for today.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0to100)
    Hi btw

    Ok, you did cause it if you are staring at someone die...
    you can't just use logical reasoning and your personal bias to answer this if we're discussing law....

    During prosecution questions will be asked to witnesses and defendant: did you see what happened? Can you swim?

    It's why many people are advised not to stand and make testimony, because of self-incriminating evidence, even if they are presumed innocent by everyone and oneself lol I watch trials and love seeing things unfold like such.


    But on to your scenarios:
    ok well now you're discussing irrelevant stuff....and bringing in details that create completely different scenarios which I never stated were manslaughter.

    Back to this scenario: this is manslaughter, involuntary. Become a lawyer, claim it, and see how you win.
    The latter scenario is basically the same as the original scenario though. Someone is drowning and you don't save them, even though you could. That is all the available information. There is no reason to believe your actions led to the person being in the water in the first place, in which case, you cannot be considered to have killed them in any sense. I don't have to be into law to easily find the legal definition as, in simplest terms, 'the unlawful killing of another person without premeditation or so-called "malice aforethought" ' Yes, you might be able to use someone's failure to help as evidence of their original culpability, i.e. it implies they probably had something to do with the person drowning in the first place, to convince a jury that they are guilty of manslaughter, but the actual act of watching someone drown without helping is not manslaughter by definition; you'd have to have pushed them in yourself. Involuntary manslaughter still requires you to have actually killed someone. By no stretch of the imagination is not saving someone's life directly killing them.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0to100)
    This is why I hate the internet sometimes. Because people find liberty to defend watching someone die. Really, people?

    So if you're relaxing at the beach or the pool or your child is in the tub...

    you're not going to help if someone is dying simply because you did not push them in??

    In fact, why is this even a thread? How is this now a debate?

    That's enough TSR for me for today.
    Of course it is utterly reprehensible to just allow someone to die when there is no risk for yourself, but "responsible" has many connotations; e.g. legally responsible vs. morally responsible.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I'm guessing there would have to be witnesses.

    So who has responsibility for the guys death, whoever's physically closest?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0to100)
    So if you're relaxing at the beach or the pool or your child is in the tub...

    you're not going to help if someone is dying simply because you did not push them in??
    then it's different because parents have a duty of care towards their children, thus an omission to save their child in this scenario would confer criminal liability.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    No, not intervening is not the same thing as causation.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0to100)
    This is why I hate the internet sometimes. Because people find liberty to defend watching someone die. Really, people?

    So if you're relaxing at the beach or the pool or your child is in the tub...

    you're not going to help if someone is dying simply because you did not push them in??

    In fact, why is this even a thread? How is this now a debate?

    That's enough TSR for me for today.
    This is why I hate the law sometimes. Why does someone have to be at fault for everything?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callicious)
    If you refuse to help yet you're able to swim, that sort of situation, I'd think it terribly amoral. Personally speaking I can't swim; I'd still risk my life to jump in to whatever body of water it is and probably die trying to flail like a Magikarp trying to save the person.
    You can't swim? Man, go out there and learn! It opens up so much
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SCIENCE :D)
    This is why I hate the law sometimes. Why does someone have to be at fault for everything?
    It is a general principle of English law that there is no criminal liability for omissions - so don't hate the law!
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: September 30, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Do you think sex education should be compulsory in schools?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.