# Story Idea: Could a man convicted of murder later sue the "victim"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 27, 2016, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/story-idea-could-a-man-convicted-of-murder-later-sue-the-victim/744375 "2016-01-27T15:05:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![CaptMurdock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captmurdock/32/11736_2.png) [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/story-idea-could-a-man-convicted-of-murder-later-sue-the-victim/744375/21 "2016-02-02T01:14:33Z")
A jury could conceivable find for the husband in a hypothetical civil case as stated above. They could also award damages in the amount of one dollar. 🆒 Try not to spend it all in one place, bro. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/story-idea-could-a-man-convicted-of-murder-later-sue-the-victim/744375/22 "2016-02-02T02:53:47Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > Do you have any legal citations for jurisprudence in 22nd century Centerville? Did Robert Heinlein? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/story-idea-could-a-man-convicted-of-murder-later-sue-the-victim/744375/23 "2016-02-02T03:30:40Z")
> [@Alley\_Dweller](#): > > How does judicial finality fit in? > > Let’s say that before the wife is discovered, he has already been through all levels of appeals and turned down. No further error of law or procedure has been discovered. Can he keep claiming there is new evidence of factual innocence and expect to have it considered? Yes. The bar is incredibly high, but as the Supreme Court said in McQuiggin v. Perkins, actual innocence is a gateway through which a petitioner may pass in a new habeas action. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2016, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/story-idea-could-a-man-convicted-of-murder-later-sue-the-victim/744375/24 "2016-02-02T15:13:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Key question: on what charge, specifically, was his conviction based? > > It makes a difference. The facts support a conspiracy charge. Conspiracy is the agreement, among at least two people, to commit a crime. That crime was complete the moment he and the hitman agreed to the killing. Her survival is not relevant to the crime’s completion. > > The facts also support murder, as a principal, even though he did not “pull the trigger.” But one element of that charge is, indeed, the death of a human being. > > So he could overturn his conviction on the basis of newly discovered actual innocence. This actually makes me wonder. When would it be better to go for conspiracy in a hitman case, instead of murder? Why might a jury believe that conspiracy applies but murder doesn’t? ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2016, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/story-idea-could-a-man-convicted-of-murder-later-sue-the-victim/744375/25 "2016-02-05T21:54:38Z")
Relevant to this thread, apparently this happened to a woman, though she didn’t actually hide out for years: > **[Wife crashes her own funeral, horrifying her husband, who had paid to have...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/02/05/wife-crashes-her-own-funeral-horrifying-her-husband-who-had-paid-have-her-killed/?postshare=8131454694512003&tid=ss_fb)** > > "Surprise," she said. "I'm still alive." Now he's in jail. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2016, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/story-idea-could-a-man-convicted-of-murder-later-sue-the-victim/744375/26 "2016-02-05T23:02:47Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Key question: on what charge, specifically, was his conviction based? > > It makes a difference. The facts support a conspiracy charge. Conspiracy is the agreement, among at least two people, to commit a crime. That crime was complete the moment he and the hitman agreed to the killing. Her survival is not relevant to the crime’s completion. Wouldn’t the prosecutor have charged the man with both Murder and Conspiracy to Commit Murder? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/story-idea-could-a-man-convicted-of-murder-later-sue-the-victim/744375.md?page=1)