Do we know the actual cause of death?
How does double jeopardy play into this?
Here’s an interesting data point: when a prisoner on death row is executed, his cause of death is officially recorded as “homicide”. Makes sense, right? after all, somebody killed him.
my cite: something I watched on the National Geographic Channel several years ago. 
IANAL, so you can take this with a grain of salt: Hinckley has already been tried for shooting Brady and found not guilty by reason of insanity. The thirteen charges against Hinckley included assault with intent to kill, which is a lesser included offense for murder. This means he can’t be charged with murder, since it would be double jeopardy.
As for the coroner’s report: a finding that the cause of death was homicide is not the same as a bringing of charges or a finding of guilt. All it means is that a coroner ruled that Brady’s death was caused by being shot in the head 33 years ago. It’s up to the rest of the legal system to figure what to do about this (if anything).
I’d love to know how the coroner decided old age wasn’t a bigger factor. Ok, Hinckley shot the guy and he had a brain injury as a result. He lived to a ripe old age of 73. Which I’m pretty sure is slightly longer than the median average lifespan for a male.
It just seems incredible that they can just ignore the natural aging process. With that logic Hinckley was facing murder charges no matter how long Brady lived. Unless Brady tripped and cracked his skull Hinckley was going to get the blame for his death. Heck even if Brady had coronary disease they’d somehow claim the sedentary lifestyle caused by his disability. Who caused the disability? Why Mr. Hinckley lets charge him with murder.
It sure seems to be nicely setup to nail Hinckley for a crime that put him in a mental institution for 30 plus years. Were those years all for nothing? Don’t they count as punishment for what he did?
Why Little Johnny is in a nice quiet home and not in a rat infested hole.
"Hinckley’s father was a financial supporter of George H. W. Bush’s 1980 presidential primary campaign. Hinckley’s older brother, Scott, had a dinner date scheduled at the home of the Vice President’s son Neil Bush the day after the Reagan assassination attempt. Neil’s wife, Sharon, indicated in a newspaper interview the day after the shooting that Scott was coming to their house as a date of a girlfriend of hers, and that she did not know “the brother [John]” but understood “that he was the renegade brother in the family.” Sharon described the Hinckleys as “a very nice family” and that they had “given a lot of money to the Bush campaign.” "
The 4th Circuit held in 1994 that the common-law year-and-a-day rule stil applies to murder charges under federal law (United States v. Chase, 18 F.3d 1166).
Legal geeky nitpick: that’s not technically binding in DC, which is not part of the Fourth Circuit.
But Chase rests it’s ruling on a century-old Supreme Court case, US v. Bell. And THAT is binding on DC.
The “year and a day rule” was applied in Quebec some years ago. A guy went into a donut shop and asked the men who had double-parked him to move their fucking car. They responded by beating him to a pulp, which put him into a coma from which he never emerged. He died a bit over a year later. The perps were never tried for murder (or anything else). They were cops.
I think that has been abolished in a lot of places now that a person’s date of death can be medically manipulated, to an extent. Next-of-kin who might otherwise not choose a DNR might do so to make sure murder charges are brought, especially if the victim is likely to remain comatose or vegetative-- contrariwise, if the victim and the accused are related-- say, brothers-- the parents who are next-of-kin might attempt everything they can to keep the victim alive just past the “year and a day” in order that their other son won’t be charged with murder, especially in a death penalty state.
The median age span for men in the US is a little over 70, but that includes everyone: babies who died shortly after birth of genetic defects, and soforth. The life expectancy is a little different, and it is 79. So yes, Brady was on track. But that doesn’t matter. I don’t know exactly how he died, but if the bullet interfered with his coughing reflex, for example, and he died of pneumonia as a result, then he died because of the bullet. Or if he died of a kidney infection that he wouldn’t have had if he weren’t on a urinary catheter because of the bullet (I don’t know that he was on a urinary catheter, just an example), then he died of the bullet. Or if he fell, and a bullet fragment in his brain moved, and cut off some vital function, then he died of the bullet.
Death certificates can have more than one cause-- and I think “cause of death,” and “manner of death” are different. If he died of pneumonia because he couldn’t cough well, then his cause of death would be pneumonia, but the manner of death would be homicide, I think. IANAL. I think there can be direct causes, indirect causes (if he smoked, which I have no idea whether he did or not, that might be an indirect cause in the pneumonia scenario), and contributing factors. Again, IANAL, I’ve just seen some death certificates. The long forms.
I agree with that reasoning concerning double jeopardy. He was already found not guilty by reason of insanity for a crime that included all the facts. Even though the victim later died, that does not change the judgment that he was insane at the time.
Crazy is a whole different thing from guilty. If Hinckley now has a “homicide while crazy” on his record, that can make a different if a prosecutor, or for that matter, family member, ever tries to have him permanently committed, or each time he applies for a furlough. Being judged insane and put away for that is not like being guilty and getting sentenced. Hinckley’s stay is indefinite, but he has been allowed supervised visits with his family that have been pretty long.
He shot Reagan in what? 1977? If he had shot, but not killed someone more than 30 years ago, and it had been someone other than the president, he would probably be out and free by now. Even if he had been found guilty of attempted assassination, if he served “good” time, he might be out on parole by now. But he would not have had those weekends and holidays with his family that he has been getting in the interim.
1981
Squeaky Fromme, who attempted to assassinate Gerald Ford, was paroled a few years ago. So, no.
Fromme didn’t wound anyone; on the other hand, she had time added to her sentence for an escape attempt. She also turned down her first parole date, which was in 1985 (and then the escape attempt was in 87, so, not firing on all cylinders). That means that she potentially could have been paroled after just ten years. The assassination attempt was in 1975. She was finally paroled in 2008, because of some law that makes parole application mandatory after 30 years. (So, I guess the application process began in 2005, but the hearing wasn’t until 2008-- she wasn’t released until 2009, probably because she had to find a community willing to take her.)
Hinckley would have been charged with a lot more than just attempted assassination, although who knows what he eventually would have been sentenced for, after plea bargaining. If he hadn’t looked good for an insanity plea, I’m pretty sure his lawyer would have advised him to take a plea.