Coroner Is Said to Rule James Brady’s Death a Homicide, 33 Years After a Shooting

Wow....what have I ever done to you?

 

I understand why *you* care, I just don't understand why the rest of us should.

 

There's more than one way to politicize Brady's death.

 

Gun nuts are the most paranoid ****s in this world.

 

What exactly is the political cause here? Does this being called a homicide somehow affect the gun debate?

 

It will obviously rile up the NRA types. More mailers = more contributions.

 

That's a pretty big accusation to lay on the medical examiner. Can you say for certain that this is a corrupt decision? Do you have evidence to the contrary that rules out that the gun shot didn't cause Brady's death?

 

I see one of our resident gun nuts has found a way to troll a major gun control advocate after his death.

 

No, LOFs are.

Followed closely by LOHs.

 

No, but your response is.

 

That's not an argument though to say that the gun shot didn't cause his death.

Murder isn't about what Brady's natural life span should be but about cause and effect. For example the families of smokers have been able to successfully sue tobacco companies even when their loved one's lived for decades from smoking. Many of these people died within the standard deviation of average life span yet the tobacco companies were still held liable for their product being the cause of death.

 

Except how do you know how long someone might live if not for that particular event? If I stab someone who is 90 and has cancer should that not be considered homicide since the person will likely die without my actions?

As far as the 36 year old that is fine but there have been hundreds of tobacco lawsuits and many of the plaintiffs were much older. I don't have stats but my guess is that the majority were not in their 30's.

That would be an indirect cause of death but let's say the punch you laid on him had caused a weakening of an artery in the brain that later hemorrhaged causing death that is a clear situation where your punch was a direct cause leading to death. At that point that would be homicide.

True which is why I don't feel comfortable expressing an opinion either way. I would like to know much more about the cause of his death and if there is other case law similar to this. Either way I don't feel that trying Hinkley now for murder is going to be worthwhile.

 

This case is very similar to the Robert Ray Middleton case that has been in the news here in the Houston area. Middleton was set on fire when he was eight years old. Thirteen years later he died from a form of cancer caused by the burns.

Shortly before Middleton died he accused Don Collins of burning him. Prosecutors charged Collins with murder, although Middleton lived for 13 years after the assault.

Prosecuters said, "even though Middleton did not die until 2011, his death was ruled a homicide because a medical examiner concluded he died from a specific type of cancer caused by the catastrophic burns covering 99 percent of his body". Prosecutors said this is why they sought murder charges.

Here is link to the story.

http://www.ksdk.com/story/news/crime/2014/03/07/don-collins-charges-lighting-robert-middleton-fire/6192967/

 

Stupid anti-fire lobby.