Page 1 of 2

1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 11:33 am
by Theis
At the 1994 annual awards dinner given by the American Association for Forensic Science, AAFS President Don Harper Mills astounded his audience in San Diego with the legal complications of a bizarre death. Here is the story.

"On 23 March 1994, the medical examiner viewed the body of Ronald Opus and concluded that he died from a shotgun wound of the head. The decedent had jumped from the top of a ten-story building intending to commit suicide (he left a note indicating his despondency). As he fell past the ninth floor, his life was interrupted by a shotgun blast through a window, which killed him instantly. Neither the shooter, nor the decedent, was aware that a safety net had been erected at the eighth floor level to protect some window washers and that Opus would not have been able to complete his suicide anyway because of this."

"Ordinarily," Dr. Mills continued, "a person who sets out to commit suicide ultimately succeeds, even though the mechanism might not be what he intended."

That Opus was shot on the way to certain death, nine stories below, probably would not have changed his mode of death from suicide to homicide. But the fact that his suicidal intent would not have been successful caused the medical examiner to feel that he had a homicide on his hands.

"The room on the ninth floor whence the shotgun blast emanated was occupied by an elderly man and his wife. They were arguing and he was threatening her with the shotgun. He was so upset that, when he pulled the trigger, he completely missed his wife and the pellets went through the window striking Opus."
"When one intends to kill subject A, but kills subject B in the attempt, one is guilty of the murder of subject B. When confronted with this charge, the old man and his wife were both adamant that neither knew the shotgun was loaded. The old man said it was his longstanding habit to threaten his wife with the unloaded shotgun. He had no intention to murder her - therefore, the killing of Opus appeared to be an accident. That is, the gun had been accidentally loaded."

"The continuing investigation turned up a witness who saw the old couple's son loading the shotgun approximately six weeks prior to the fatal incident. It transpired that the old lady had cut off her son's financial support and the son, knowing the propensity of his father to use the shotgun threateningly, loaded the gun with the expectation that his father would shoot his mother.

The case now becomes one of murder on the part of the son for the death of Ronald Opus.

There was an exquisite twist.

"Further investigation revealed that the son (Ronald Opus) had become increasingly despondent over the failure of his attempt to engineer his mother's murder. This led him to jump off the ten-story building on March 23, only to be killed by a shotgun blast through a ninth story window.

"The medical examiner closed the case as a suicide."

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 11:44 am
by Ijineda
Been watching Magnolia lately?  ;)

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 11:49 am
by ozzy72
I used this in a lesson once with some law students... they were rolling around on the floor ;D

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:31 pm
by 4_Series_Scania
Thats a different way to go!  ;D

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:41 pm
by Saitek
Seen it before. ;D

The man here though (England) could be charged with attempted murder on his wife and murder of his son who died. It would be down to the court to decide whether he should be guilty of murder, under the principle of transferred malice, whereby he intended to kill someone and accidently killed another. If he intended to kill his wife and killed the man he would be charged with murder and attempted murder. This would give him a life sentence as that is mandatory for murder. However, due to the unusual nature of this, (no-one could foresee such occurances) he is actually likely to be charged with involuntary masnlaughter as here the judge does not have to give out a life sentence and could give a more appropriate lighter sentence.
This of course is unless he never had the intent to kill his wife. If so he would be charged with involuntary manslaughter because he tried to cause grevious bodily harm that resulted in death, under the transferred malice principle, and caused the unlawful death of another.

The man would be prosecuted because under the "but for" principle the son would be still alive. The fact that the son intended to kill himself makes no difference. The net would have saved him his life and, but for the defendant's actions he would be still alive.

However, complications come in because the son loaded the gun and the father never realised. This is crucial to the defence. If he had known the danger he may not use the weapon. The fact that the wicken son in trying to use his Dad to kill his Mum killed him may cause a jury to refuse to find him guilty at all.  

So here, he would be charged with involuntary manslaughter and attempted GBH/murder as well as domestic abuse offences.

He would almost certainly be found not guilty by the jury as they would be reluctant to accuse him of a crime that he never intended to commit nor could foresee. My predicitons would be that due to his age and the cicumstances he would be given a suspended sentence. probably of about 3 years.

All that aside, he would have to have medical checks to see if he was sane before the trial. If insane he would be not guilty by reason of insanity and would get locked up indefinately. If sane see above.  

Hope that clears things up! :P Oh duh it was a US story. ;)

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:51 pm
by Saitek
After I posted that I saw this on the news. It makes my explanation worthless and shows that justice is gone from the courts and what I have learnt just isn't done.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manc ... 700494.stm

A lawyer. Diminished responsibility in slashing someone all over to death? Big joke.

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 5:10 pm
by Katahu
After I posted that I saw this on the news. It makes my explanation worthless and shows that justice is gone from the courts and what I have learnt just isn't done.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manc ... 700494.stm

A lawyer. Diminished responsibility in slashing someone all over to death? Big joke.


Now that's a tragedy. :-/

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 1:38 pm
by jordonj
I knew someone whose boyfriend (and another woman) accused her of cheating on him out of the blue.  They put a rope around her neck so that if she moved it choked her (and making her move by burning her with a lighter or hitting her with a door).  She fought them and a neighbor called the police.

The two were charged with conspiracy to commit torture, which carries a life sentence.  Ironically, attempted murder does not, while assault with intent to commit murder does...

As for that shyster, he's rich and powerful...why are you so shocked?

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:17 pm
by ozzy72
A friend of mine who lives in the East of Hungary tried to commit suicide after his wife left him, taking their kids, for another man. He decided to hang himself from a tree outside the boyfriends house. The guy has three degrees... but alas not a Boy Scouts knots badge. He tied a slip-knot, leapt from the branch and managed to break both legs ;D

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:22 pm
by Theis
LOL!! ;D ;D ;D

ohh. how must he had feeled stupid! ;D

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 4:17 pm
by Saitek
Well hopefully he lived to the folly of that and be of use to society with the wealth of knowledge he possessed.

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 6:05 pm
by Hagar
I thought Theis' bizarre story seemed just a little too perfect. ::) ;) http://www.snopes.com/horrors/freakish/opus.htm
A story this good should be true. Alas, it's not. There never was a suicidal Ronald Opus, a feuding, shotgun-wielding older couple, or an increasingly confused medical examiner trying to get to the bottom of things. But there is some truth to it, for there is a Don Harper Mills, and he did tell this very story at a meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences.

Here's how Mills explained his involvement with the story in a 1997 interview:

I made up the story in 1987 to present at the meeting, for entertainment and to illustrate how if you alter a few small facts you greatly alter the legal consequences. In 1994 someone copied it on to the Internet. I was told it had already garnered 200,000 enquiries on the Net. In the past two years I've had around 400 telephone calls about it - librarians, journalists, law students, even law professors wanting to incorporate it into text books.
It was hypothetical; just a story made up to illustrate a point. It's hard to imagine anyone at that 1987 meeting took it for anything else.

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 6:30 pm
by Saitek
I think we all did. It was too crazy to be real. ;)

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:55 am
by BFMF
I guess anything is possible.

Off topic, here's a bizzare thing that happened to a friend of a friend.

I have a friend who knows a guy who once ran a red light and broadsided a car. Unfortunantly, he didn't have any auto insurance.

But fortunantly, because the guy he hit had just robbed a convenience store, he was let off with a warning ;D

Re: 1994's Most Bizarre Suicide

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:23 am
by 61_OTU
I have a friend who knows a guy who once ran a red light and broadsided a car. Unfortunantly, he didn't have any auto insurance.

But fortunantly, because the guy he hit had just robbed a convenience store, he was let off with a warning ;D


I'm surprised under US law that the thief couldn't sue for loss of earnings ::) ;D