Legal not moral question and assuming YMMV depending on state. Inspired by a 911 call after a guy shot some intruders.
Let’s say some guy breaks into my house and I shoot them or smash them in the head with a baseball bat. For any reason whatsoever, I decide I’m just going to let them die before calling the police. Have I committed a crime? Do I owe then any duty of care if I’m acting in self-defense?
I’d say it depends on whether you want to be charged with murder.
Just call 911 for police, you might mention an injured person. They’ll send the necessary people.
You’ll want the body picked up. At least.
I am not a lawyer.
If you injure an intruder, that sounds legal to me.
If you withhold medical attention and that means they die, I reckon you can be charge with manslaughter.
However, you’re risking injury if they’re not as badly injured as you think they are.
Personally, as I would be calling 911 anyways, I would state I have an injured intruder and let LEO/EMS deal with it.
ETA: Also, your first duty is to any family members/friend/pets in the residence.
Do you need answer fast?
I would debate that you have a higher legal or moral duty to your animals than to any human. Even one you just shot for breaking into your occupied house.
The lowliest human outranks the greatest animal on Earth.
Not my dog. He is integral to my survival. I’d certainly defend him over a lowlife burglar, evildoer. In a heartbeat.
From a criminal law standpoint you are required to report crimes that you observe, although the penalties for not reporting a crime are generally pretty inconsequential and not pursued by prosecutors except as a punitive measure. If you injure someone and withhold access to medical care resulting in death from a potentially remediable trauma, you can certainly be charged with voluntary manslaughter even if the initial injury was justifiable by self-defense, especially if it can be shown by your statements or actions that you are “just going to let them die before calling the police”; this could fall under criminal negligence depending on the degree of intent (mens rea). Whether a prosecutor would actually charge you would depend on the particulars of the case (i.e. whether your actions were legally justified in self-defense or defense of property under pertinent law), the background of the victim (someone known to have previously threatened you or a serial offender), and whether they thought they could get a grand jury to indict you.
“Duty of care” is a tort law term to the implicit or explicit responsibility you have toward another party. In general, in a case where you are justified in using potentially lethal force in self-defense or defense of property, you have no duty of care toward the intruder while they are in active commission of a crime, and they are assumed by their criminal actions to have forfeit any claim to your liability to prevent them from harm, either incidental or deliberate. In other words, if someone is trying to break into your house by crawling up a drainpipe and forcing a second story window, and you shove them back resulting in their falling off the roof and onto a concrete apron to serious injury, you are not liable for their injuries because they are a direct consequence of putting you into the position of having to act in self-defense. You are also not specifically liable for rendering aid or calling emergency medical services although having the ability to do so and choosing not to could be considered willful negligence (i.e. you could have acted to prevent more severe harm or death with minimal effort and chose not to).
Of course, there is a lot of variation in laws on what constitutes ‘legitimate’ self-defense between states, and different prosecutors or attorneys general have wildly varying philosophies on the interpretation and application of statutes regarding home invasion, appropriate use of force, et cetera, and what a jury may decide in terms of liability is always a toss-up. If you have the misfortune to ever be in such a scenario you should get legal counsel experienced in both criminal defense and civil liability before offering any statement to the police because everything you say can potentially be used as evidence of perfidy even if you think it to be innocuous or justified. It will cost you a ton of money, but not as much as spending time in prison or losing a civil suit.
Stranger
Nope. If somebody’s attacking one of my non-human housemates, I’m going after that attacker with no holds barred. And, considering the shape I’m in, if there’s a weapon within reach I’m gonna need it.
And we are also animals.
(I would certainly call 911 the moment I got a chance, though.)
I realize that we are in Factual Questions, so I’ll just note that there are legions of people (myself included) who would vehemently disagree with this statement.
I thought I remembered LSL saying that he never had or wanted a pet, and found it.
There are two aspects to distinguish here. One is whether you committed a crime in killing the intruder. That’s a question of self-defense and the limits to it; the answer will be highly dependent on the facts of the case, state law in question, and the attitudes of the particular jury.
The other question is whether you commit a crime in not reporting that you smashed in the intruder’s head. The answer to this question is certainly no. Under the Fifth Amendment, you can’t be compelled to turn yourself in for a crime or possible crime or otherwise incriminate yourself.
Reporting an injured person who needs medical attention is not turning yourself in for a crime. It could lead to an arrest but I don’t think it would be covered under the 5th.
What about a human I had my attack dog maul for breaking into my house?
Yup, I’m one.
Haven’t dealt with this scenario before (thankfully) but here goes:
-
Threshold (and probably most important) question is whether the homeowner acted in self defense. The mere presence of an intruder does not necessarily authorize the use of deadly force. There must be a reasonable belief of an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death, etc. However, I inferred from the question that self defense is presumed in the hypothetical and that @Saint_Cad is more interested in the aftermath.
-
It is probably not a crime to fail to immediately report the incident to authorities (police or EMS). While there is a crime known as misprision (i.e., failure to report a crime), it’s archaic in many jurisdictions. There is currently a federal misprision statute (18 USC 4) but the courts have held that misprision of a third party felony requires active concealment and that mere failure to report is insufficient to violate the statute (it’s similar to an accessory after the fact charge). Importantly, the crimes here are the burglary, breaking and entering, assault, etc. on the part of the intruder because we’re presuming self defense on the part of the resident.
-
That said, at some point you have to do something about the now dead intruder in your home. There are laws that require one to report a death (with or without regard to cause), as well as public health laws and regulations that mandate report and removal of corpses. In addition, you certainly don’t want a decomposing body in your home so you’re going to have to do something about it for practical reasons. The moment you do, you’re now potentially concealing a crime (again by the intruder, assuming self defense here) and/or obstructing justice.
-
There may be civil liability for failing to call the authorities in a timely manner if it results in harm to the intruder. This really depends on the jurisdiction. Generally speaking, there is no duty to rescue, render aid, intervene, etc. but some jurisdictions require property owners to render aid to known injured persons on their property. However, an exception to that exception is often made for trespassers.
-
If a client called me and relayed the foregoing facts, my advice would probably be: “Call 911, report a self defense incident, then exercise your 5th and 6th Amendment rights until I get there.”
Usual disclaimer: IAAL but not your lawyer, this is not legal advice, YMMV, laws vary by jurisdiction, etc.
I think the point of the OP is to ask whether not calling for help is a crime. The possible crime is not the act of self defence. It is the voluntary manslaughter, occurring once the threat is neutralised. Once they are dead you have a different crime you can claim the 5th for immunity of not reporting, but a crime it remains.
Claiming 5th amendment protection seems a difficult issue. If you hit a pedestrian in your car, the same logic would suggest that you are similarly protected from calling for aid because your driving may have been criminally negligent. Seems unlikely to wash.
I was under the impression that the laws and case history were clear that once an intruder threat is neutralised, you cease to have any legal protection if you cause further harm. You cannot shoot a running intruder in the back for instance. A critically injured intruder is no longer a threat, and in general I would expect that they then attract protection from further harm. Harm incurred by deliberate withholding of aid is going to raise difficult questions that seem unlikely to be protected.
Darn you.
Beat me to it.
I was thinking that the difference between this site and Reddit is that on Reddit, the poster WOULD be asking an emergent question!