# A technically legal way to kill someone? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 5, 2001, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608 "2001-06-05T02:05:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/1 "2001-06-05T02:05:40Z")
Well, this is probably an instance of a little knowlege getting you into a lot of trouble, but… I’m reading through my Torts book. We’re on the section about the privilege of self defense to the tort of battery. One of the subsections is “Injury to a Third Party.” In it is says: > [@](#): > > In the situation in which the defendant, defending himself against A, unintentionally shoots B instead: So far as “transferred intent” is concerned, the privilege of self defense is carried over and the defendant is held NOT to be liable to B. So let’s say two people want to get rid of a third person. All three gather in a room. Bill comes after Jack with the intent to inflict deadly force. Jack pulls out a pistol and, oops, “accidently” shoots Ted. Now what? Oh sure, there’s lying to the police, and perjury, etc, to deal with, but anyone willing to kill someone doesn’t really care about lying on the stand. Jack: “Honest, your honor, I was sure Bill was going to kill me. I really didn’t mean to hit Ted.” Bill: “I was enraged, your honor. It was temporary insanity! I couldn’t help myself. I really meant to kill Jack. Damn shame about Ted dying and all.” Am I reading too much into this scenario? What’s to stop it from occuring? ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/2 "2001-06-05T02:30:59Z")
Anthony Burgess, in _A Dead Man in Deptford_, hypothesizes just such a scenario to explain the conspiracy to murder Christopher Marlowe. (But they did it with a knife.) They got away with murder. ---
**Author:** ![Boris\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/fbc32d/32.png) [@Boris\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boris_B)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/3 "2001-06-05T02:33:23Z")
Well, I think the lying is really the key. I mean, the intentionality of killing someone is what makes it murder, but as you’ve noted, that doesn’t mean you are magically forced to tell the truth on the stand. But I do think you’re reading too much into it. It really isn’t too different from a situation in which Bill and Jack both say Ted was coming at poor Bill (who happened to be carrying a 12-gauge) with a letter-opener and a foaming mouth. In reality, Ted was completely innocent, non-rabid, and non-friend-stabbing, but Bill and Jack can lie. Back to your scenario: I imagine justice could be done this way. (I am an old fan of the show Homicide and its non-fiction predecessor _Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets_.) The two detective say, “Hey Bill, we know you were enraged, but couldn’t it have been that it was really Jack who was enraged? I mean, you two really hated old Ted, right? Maybe he didn’t miss?” and so on. For the first hour of the interview, Bill sticks to his story. But after a while, things start to slip out. “Yeah, but Jack told me to say … I mean, the truth is-” “Wait a minute, “Jack told you to say”? I thought you tried to kill Jack? If you two hate each other, and were so enraged and disoriented when the thing happend, how come your stories match up so perfectly? If you come clean now we let you go after six months in the loony bin.” Bill cracks. Just a scenario, but like I said, I’m a _big_ fan. ---
**Author:** ![LifeWillFall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/46a35a/32.png) [@LifeWillFall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LifeWillFall)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/4 "2001-06-05T02:34:02Z")
I don’t know the answer to your question or anything I just wanted to say that your mock dialogue was very entertaining. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/5 "2001-06-05T03:09:31Z")
Committing a crime and not getting caught is a “technically legal way of committing a crime”? I don’t think so. It is still illegal, even if you didn’t get caught. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/6 "2001-06-05T03:19:28Z")
Surely some law on the books, such as manslaughter, would be applicable. No matter what anyone may have “intended”, the laws frowns in the extreme at leaving dead bodies on the ground. Or if no criminal charges, how about a wrongful death lawsuit? ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/7 "2001-06-05T03:19:33Z")
I don’t see how the scenario in the original post is any more useful than any other scenario in which you can cause someone’s death “by accident”. Invite Ted over to your house at night, then shoot him and say “it was self-defense, I thought he was a robber”. Have your friend Bill push Ted out in front of your car. Stumble into Ted when he’s waiting on the subway platform and knock him under the wheels. etc… ---
**Author:** ![Kalt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Kalt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalt)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/8 "2001-06-05T03:29:16Z")
It would just be the same thing as shooting ted yourself and saying “he was attacking me” … your whole premise is based on the fact that nobody is looking. You can get away with all sorts of stuff when nobody is looking, if you are willing to lie about it after the fact. That doesn’t make it legal or right. In fact, it would be dumb to get a 3rd person involved (bill) - he may blackmail you later. After all, you are the one who did the killing (of course he would be a principle and guilty too). If you are going to kill someone, doing it alone is the smartest rout to take. You could even kill ted and then say you weren’t there. It worked for OJ. ---
**Author:** ![Danimal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/bb73d2/32.png) [@Danimal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Danimal)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/9 "2001-06-05T03:32:24Z")
Even leaving aside all moral and ethical concerns, I would be really reluctant to play the part of Bill in that hypothetical. After all, the biggest hole in Jack’s story is that he didn’t kill Bill, the guy he was supposedly defending himself against. So if I’m Bill, I know Jack has a very good reason to blow me away; it makes his story more believable and it keeps me from ever telling what I know. And if he’s planning this, Jack obviously isn’t a squeamish fellow. The others are right, of course, that there isn’t anything legal about the scheme, technically or otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![fnord1966](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ad7895/32.png) [@fnord1966](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fnord1966)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/10 "2001-06-05T03:55:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Arnold Winkelried \* > \*\*I don’t see how the scenario in the original post is any more useful than any other scenario in which you can cause someone’s death “by accident”. > Invite Ted over to your house at night, then shoot him and say “it was self-defense, I thought he was a robber”. > \*\* Actually for that to hold up, you cant leave your door unlocked, or any door or window unlocked or open. There has to be signs of a break in, and cops are good, and they will be able to tell if you did it. Anyways Ted told his wife where he was going after talking to you on the phone. She testifies, you go to jail, she collects the insurance money and runs away with Bill. ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/11 "2001-06-05T04:10:35Z")
It seems to me that most of the posts so far have dealt with how to kill someone and _get away with it_. There are many ways to do this. The difficulty is that the OP asked if there were any way to _kill someone legally_. In my opinion it is not, simply because murder is illegal. The law looks at intent. There are lots of accidental ways to kill someone; however, if you intend to kill someone, and merely make it _look_ like an accident, that is definitely not legal. So I think if your intent is to find a way to kill someone legally, you will be stymied; killing is illegal simply by virtue of what it is. The method doesn’t really matter. ---
**Author:** ![Neurodoc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/848f3c/32.png) [@Neurodoc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurodoc)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/12 "2001-06-05T04:45:03Z")
The law you refer to exculpates you from CRIMINAL prosecution for ACCIDENTALLY injuring or killing someone when you shoot at (or otherwise try to defend yourself) from a criminal attack, in which your deadly force was INTENDED to stop the threat by your assailant. It does not protect you from being CIVILLY liable for wrongful death or injury to your UNINTENDED target. You may be convicted of criminal battery if you were NEGLIGENT (say in the discharge of your firearm)and you will certainly face CIVIL liability for the “accident,” which is harder to defend against. As regards CRIMINAL liability, the criminal you were shooting at will more likely be charged with any injury that you inlict to an innocent bystander, especially if the scumbag assailant you were defending against did something like pushing your gunhand out of his way while you were trying to shoot him, causing your shot to go awry. ---
**Author:** ![Zapper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a88e4f/32.png) [@Zapper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zapper)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/13 "2001-06-05T04:59:03Z")
There is, in fact, a way to legally kill someone, although I don’t know if it’s legal in your town. It’s called ABORTION. And as you should know it’s very legal in some places. Not in my country, fortunately. ---
**Author:** ![Danimal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/bb73d2/32.png) [@Danimal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Danimal)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/14 "2001-06-05T05:11:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Neurodoc \* > **The law you refer to exculpates you from CRIMINAL prosecution for ACCIDENTALLY injuring or killing someone when you shoot at (or otherwise try to defend yourself) from a criminal attack, in which your deadly force was INTENDED to stop the threat by your assailant. It does not protect you from being CIVILLY liable for wrongful death or injury to your UNINTENDED target. You may be convicted of criminal battery if you were NEGLIGENT (say in the discharge of your firearm)and you will certainly face CIVIL liability for the “accident,” which is harder to defend against.** Well, Enderw24 says he read this in his Torts book, so if his Torts text is right, then self-defense is a full defense to civil as well as criminal liability, at least in whatever jurisdiction his book was written in. ---
**Author:** ![Sue\_Duhnym](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@Sue\_Duhnym](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sue_Duhnym)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/15 "2001-06-05T05:50:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zapper \* > \*\*There is, in fact, a way to legally kill someone, although I don’t know if it’s legal in your town. > It’s called ABORTION. And as you should know it’s very legal in some places. Not in my country, fortunately. > \*\* Oh, fer chrissakes. :rolleyes: I hate this time of year. ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/16 "2001-06-05T05:59:24Z")
Ok, Jack assaults Bill with a deadly weapon, Bill shoots poor Ted. The cops are just dumb enough to buy it, and the prosecutor tells Jack that he looks good for a count of felony murder, since the death of Ted is a consequence of his felony assault on Bill. Jack now decides how much he likes the idea of not only helping Bill kill Ted, but also doing major prison time to make the story stick. Tris ---
**Author:** ![Sultan\_Kinkari](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7bcc69/32.png) [@Sultan\_Kinkari](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sultan_Kinkari)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/17 "2001-06-05T07:04:44Z")
This is the clause protects police officers(FBI, CIA, et. al.) in the event that an innocent bystander were to be killed or injured during a police shootout. The likelihood that Bill gets of scot-free is slim. He could be charged with brandishing a firearm with intent to harm and could face up to 5. ---
**Author:** ![jester21](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ed655f/32.png) [@jester21](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jester21)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 9:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/18 "2001-06-05T09:21:25Z")
I am surprised you are all forgetting the (very forgettable) movie: Double Jeopordy. While being a mediocre movie at best, the premise was actually kinda interesting. If you were convicted of killing someone who you didn’t actually kill, and they were still alive. AND you served your entire sentence, Then you could indeed, (once released of course, and off parole, ect.) kill them in cold blood and could not be charged with it. Does that make the murder legal? I’ll let other’s argue that little senerio, but irregardless, the chances of not going back to jail I would think would be slim. While not being charged w/ murder, I’m sure the local procecuter would be more than happy to file charges on unlawful discharge of a weapon, concealed weapons violations, and any of host of other charges that are usually ignored in a murder case. And the penalties for most would be harsh for a convicted murderer ;o) ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/19 "2001-06-05T10:05:30Z")
If you were convicted of a homicide and the victim later turned up alive, the conviction would be overturned and the trial would be pretty much erased because obviously the State committed a wrong when it prosecuted you for a crime you didn’t commit. So, if you did kill the person you were supposed to have killed you would be tried and probably convicted of homicide. And that conviction would stick. ---
**Author:** ![Some\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@Some\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Some_Guy)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2001, 10:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608/20 "2001-06-05T10:14:16Z")
sigh. No, the movie _Double Jeopardy_ isn’t accurate - the U.S. Constitution does provide that you can’t be tried repeatedly on the same charges related to the same act. It’s a very s[ecific limitation intended to prevent the government from harassing people with multiple baseless prosecutions. However the first “killing” (whether it was actually an attempted muder, a frame, or a mistake on the part of prosecutors) is a separate act from the second genuine killing. The fact that they have a very similar premise doesn’t stop them from being separate acts. You’ll get thrown i the pokey again, sorry. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-technically-legal-way-to-kill-someone/67608.md?page=2)