Involuntary Manslaughter Case
Module Five
Team Assignment: Criminal Law and Procedure
Group 5
Ohio University
Law and Society
BUSL 255
Facts
1. Kevorkian Pharmaceutical Institute has developed a cancer treatment that is extremely promising and profitable. The treatment involves “salting” cancerous tumors with tiny metallic particles, and then exposing them to high intensity radio waves that cause the metallic pellets to heat up and destroy the tumor without harming the healthy tissue. Although studies have been positive (95% of all cases), researchers have also noted an extremely adverse, and potentially lethal, side effect in 5% of patients tested, and they do not know why.
2. Nevertheless, the Institute has decided to market the cancer treatment. In …show more content…
The individual committing the crime was aware of the risk of injury and willfully disregarded it (Involuntary Manslaughter, 2010).
Analysis: The facts indicate that Dr. McCoy was unaware of the employee’s presence in the warehouse, and therefore Dr. McCoy had no intention to kill him. However, he was aware of the risks associated with arson and disregarded any consequences that may occur.
Conclusion: The death of the employee would meet the criteria for involuntary manslaughter based on the facts and analysis. Dr. McCoy intended to burn down the warehouse (requisite mens rea) and committed the act that killed the employee (requisite actus reus) even though that was not his intention.
c. Issue: Does the fact that Dr. McCoy intentionally struck Mr. Sulu in the jaw show sufficient evidence to constitute a charge of battery?
Rule: Battery, a violent crime, constitutes physically harming another individual intentionally and in an unexcused manner (Miller & Jentz, 2010, p. …show more content…
184).
Analysis: Dr. Spock could have accidentally placed the money in his account, but an intentional mental state would have been necessary to invest the Institute’s money into his investments with a disposable diaper company.
Conclusion: Mistake of fact is not a sufficient defense to avoid liability for embezzlement. It is clear that Dr. Spock intentionally placed the money in the disposable diaper industry.
b. Issue: Is insanity a criminal defense that Dr. Spock could plead to avoid all liability for embezzlement?
Rule: Two standards exist to establish insanity. The first is the Model Penal Code, which is used in almost all federal courts and some state courts. If a defendant is going to claim insanity as a defense, he must prove that he has either a mental disease or defect that renders him unable to both decide what is right verses what is wrong and understand the requirements of the law. Another rule is the M’Naghten test, which voids responsibility if, at the time of the offense, the person did not know the nature or quality of the act or that the act was wrong. There is also the irresistible-impulse test, where a person knows that their actions are wrong, but cannot resist doing it. In spite of all of the tests, proving insanity is extremely difficult, and
Team Assignment: Criminal Law and Procedure
Group 5
Ohio University
Law and Society
BUSL 255
Facts
1. Kevorkian Pharmaceutical Institute has developed a cancer treatment that is extremely promising and profitable. The treatment involves “salting” cancerous tumors with tiny metallic particles, and then exposing them to high intensity radio waves that cause the metallic pellets to heat up and destroy the tumor without harming the healthy tissue. Although studies have been positive (95% of all cases), researchers have also noted an extremely adverse, and potentially lethal, side effect in 5% of patients tested, and they do not know why.
2. Nevertheless, the Institute has decided to market the cancer treatment. In …show more content…
The individual committing the crime was aware of the risk of injury and willfully disregarded it (Involuntary Manslaughter, 2010).
Analysis: The facts indicate that Dr. McCoy was unaware of the employee’s presence in the warehouse, and therefore Dr. McCoy had no intention to kill him. However, he was aware of the risks associated with arson and disregarded any consequences that may occur.
Conclusion: The death of the employee would meet the criteria for involuntary manslaughter based on the facts and analysis. Dr. McCoy intended to burn down the warehouse (requisite mens rea) and committed the act that killed the employee (requisite actus reus) even though that was not his intention.
c. Issue: Does the fact that Dr. McCoy intentionally struck Mr. Sulu in the jaw show sufficient evidence to constitute a charge of battery?
Rule: Battery, a violent crime, constitutes physically harming another individual intentionally and in an unexcused manner (Miller & Jentz, 2010, p. …show more content…
184).
Analysis: Dr. Spock could have accidentally placed the money in his account, but an intentional mental state would have been necessary to invest the Institute’s money into his investments with a disposable diaper company.
Conclusion: Mistake of fact is not a sufficient defense to avoid liability for embezzlement. It is clear that Dr. Spock intentionally placed the money in the disposable diaper industry.
b. Issue: Is insanity a criminal defense that Dr. Spock could plead to avoid all liability for embezzlement?
Rule: Two standards exist to establish insanity. The first is the Model Penal Code, which is used in almost all federal courts and some state courts. If a defendant is going to claim insanity as a defense, he must prove that he has either a mental disease or defect that renders him unable to both decide what is right verses what is wrong and understand the requirements of the law. Another rule is the M’Naghten test, which voids responsibility if, at the time of the offense, the person did not know the nature or quality of the act or that the act was wrong. There is also the irresistible-impulse test, where a person knows that their actions are wrong, but cannot resist doing it. In spite of all of the tests, proving insanity is extremely difficult, and