Question about charging someone with murder

[rpannier]

Under the law, if someone dies in the commission of a crime, the criminal can be charged with murder or manslaughter. So if someone goes into a bank to rob it and while robbing the bank someone dies of a heart attack the robber can be charged with murder. That's pretty straight forward.
So, then if some CEO, or group of Corporate Executives rip off a company, thus bankrupting someones retirement (or wipes out their life savings) and that person has a heart attack and dies when they've discovered their money is gone, can the CEO or group of corporate executives be charged with murder?
If they can...has this ever happened?
If they can't...then why not?
The two scenarios seem to be similar to me. A crime was committed and someone died as a result of that crime.

[KitchenWitch]

1. It would be very difficult to prove the connection IMHO.

[drhilarius]

2. You're talking about felony murder...

It would be hard to prove a direct correlation. If, however, you were Jack McCoy on "Law and Order", then you might pull it off.

[rpannier]

3. Lol

Jack Mc Coy reminds me of McGuyver. The police find two pieces of scotch tape and a red highlighter that at one time belonged to the suspect and he gets a conviction.

[SheilaT]

4. It depends on how the laws in

a particular state are written. Different states have different definitions of murder, capital murder, homicide, manslaughter, and so on.

So basically there would have to be a law that says if what a CEO or Corporate Executive does is a crime, and in the course of the commission of that crime someone dies, then murder (manslaughter or whatever term that state uses) has occurred.

But again, proving the connection between the heart attack and what the CEO or Corporate Executives did is the hard part, and probably almost completely unlikely to be proven.

But here's the real problem. Laws are often written by a set of people who criminalize the behavior of people they think are completely unlike themselves. Which is why white collar crime usually doesn't carry much in the way of penalties. Those are people a lot like the lawmakers, and therefore not as easily punished. Unlike those other, nasty people, who rape and murder and rob people.

[Jersey Devil]

6. yes, proximate cause would be a problem

Today most jurisdictions have limited the rule by requiring that the felony must be a dangerous one or that the killing is foreseeable, or both. Statutes that restrict the application of the rule to dangerous felonies usually enumerate the crimes. Burglary, kidnapping, rape, and robbery are typical felonies that invoke the rule. Under a number of statutes, the felony must be a proximate cause of the death. In other words, the killing must have been a natural and direct consequence of the felony.

Felony-murder cannot be charged if all the elements of the felony are included in the elements of murder. This is known as the merger doctrine, which holds that if the underlying felony merges with the killing, the felony cannot constitute felony-murder. For example, all of the elements of assault and battery with a deadly weapon are included in murder. If a killing, therefore, occurred during the course of this crime, the accused would be charged with murder.

http://www.answers.com/topic/felony-murder-rule

[serryjw]

7. It would be fascinating to see

If Lay & Skilling get convicted could there be civil or criminal lawsuits from the people that were defrauded? They would have to have owned enormous amount of stock form this to work. Would be a great test case.

[Jersey Devil]

5. The answer is "no"

The "felony murder rule" originated in English common law for deaths that occur during the course of certain felonies whether death or serious bodily injury was intended or not. However, under common law this rule only applied to specific crimes. For instance, it did apply to burglary but only burglary after dark.

Today the felony murder rule is followed in the US through the codification of English common law into our homicide statutes, but once again only specific felonies are covered such as robbery (your example), burglary, kidnapping, rape and arson.

Embezzlement was never a felony under the English commonlaw felony murder rule and I have never seen any US statute that would incorporate it into the codified American version of the rule which generally cover only those felonies that involve violence or the potential for violence.