(Purely a hypothetical question, don’t need answer fast…)
Joe and Jane are having a consensual affair. Joe invites Jane to go away with him for the weekend, she agrees. He picks her up and drives her to a room/cabin/condo of some sort that he has access to.
Once there, they have a fight, and break up.
He says “get out”. She says “hey, I have no idea where we are or how to get back home, you picked me up at the airport and drove me here”. He says “not my problem”, pushes her out the front door, and locks it behind her.
(He does not keep any of her possessions or anything, she has everything she showed up with.)
Several different variants of this hypothetical:
(1) They are out in some truly life-threatening wilderness, due to isolation or weather, and she’s nearly certain to die of exposure
(2) They’re way off the beaten path, but there’s no reason to think that she won’t be able to follow the driveway for several miles, and eventually flag down a passing car (although obviously there’s risk there), plus then she lives several states away
(3) They’re in civilization, so there’s no particular risk of death. But she’s going to be out of pocket for an uber and a plane flight and an enormous amount of hassle to get back home
I feel like (1) certainly feels like a crime, and (2) feels somewhat less like a crime. Not sure about (3). But I’m not sure what precise law Jack would be violating. It’s certainly not kidnapping/imprisonment, is it? I mean, he’s quite literally doing the opposite of holding her against her will.
IANA law-talking type, but there’s probably several ways to argue a civil lawsuit on Jane’s part, to get restitution from Joe for the Uber fare and possibly pain and suffering, etc. That’s not a criminal charge, of course.
I can’t imagine that it’s a crime of any sort, and certainly shouldn’t be. In general, you don’t owe anyone shelter, and in the specific situations where you do (parent/child, landlord/tenant etc.) you probably should not be having an affair with them.
Are you seriously suggesting that no crime is committed if you invite and drive someone to a place where they would die without shelter, and then physically force them outside?
If you act intentionally, and death is a forseeable consequence of your intentional act, that’s attempted murder. There is nothing involuntary about it.
IANAL, but I believe that murder specifically requires that the death of the victim be the intended outcome rather than merely foreseeable as a possible/probable consequence of one’s actions.
OPs victim is not dead. Just put out of the house. Presumably she had a cel-phone. If the victim felt threatened she could call 911.
They would find her. ( I don’t know why the victim has to be a woman)
I’ll assume she dies and that they are in New York.
This seems at least like criminally negligent homicide, which requires Joe to have, ahem, criminal negligence in causing Jane’s death. N.Y. Penal Law Sec. 125.10. “Criminal negligence” means that Joe “failed to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk” that death will occur, and his failure to perceive the risk “constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.” N.Y. Penal Law Sec. 15.05(4). A reasonable person realizing that she might die would drop her off somewhere safe instead.
Depending on his intention and his awareness, more serious charges might apply.
Manslaughter in the second degree, N.Y. Penal Law Sec. 124.15: He “recklessly” caused her to die, which implies that he was aware of and consciously disregarded the risk that she would die.
Manslaughter in the first degree, N.Y. Penal Law Sec. 125.20: Joe only intended to cause serious injury (like frostbite) but Jane up and died anyway.
Murder in the second degree, N.Y. Penal Law 125.25: Joe recklessly left her out in the cold, which created a grave risk of Jane’s death and he “evinced depraved indifference” about whether she lived or died. So, he knew the weather was likely to kill her but he didn’t care.
It probably wouldn’t be murder in the first degree (N.Y Penal Law Sec. 125.27(1)(x)), because even if Joe acted in an especially cruel and wanton manner intended to inflict torture (the depraved infliction of extreme physical pain), there is no evidence that he “relished” inflicting the pain on Jane (for example, if he had stayed to watch her slowly and painfully freeze to death).
Where did you get that idea? Under scenario 1 and 2 it is implied that Jane is either didn’t bring or doesn’t have (shocking, I know :eek:) a cell phone or else is out of cell phone range.
Who says it does? 50/50 chance, sometimes the coin comes up tails. Does it have to be a male?
In the criminal justice system, sexually based offenses are considered especially heinous. In New York City, the dedicated detectives who investigate these vicious felonies are members of an elite squad known as the Special Victims Unit.
Assuming she dies makes it a completely different question than the OP. You may as well assume she was abducted by aliens.
Prior to any harm happening to the woman I can’t think of any laws that are broken. If she were under 18, elderly, or disabled and the other person was a caregiver that might fall under neglect.