Depraved Indifference

[Nakita Akita]

what if you knew someone that told you that a long time ago, when they were young, they worked in a nursing home.
While they worked there, there was a lady that was maybe 90 or something.
The older Lady had diabetes and the person knew she had it.
The older Lady used to try to sneak candybars and stuff like that because she still wanted to eat a lot of sugar.
The younger person one day went and bought the older Lady a bunch of sweet snacks and gave them to her.
That night the older Lady ate the candy and went into a coma and died.
The people that worked there and maybe her family just figured that the older Lady snuck the stuff in herself.

I know this is probably depraved indifference resulting in death, but is there anything I could or should do?
I still see the killer on a daily basis and I think about it a lot.
I've entertained the thought that the bitch, I mean the killer may have been lying, but why would someone make up such a story?

 

[Sibyl]

I've known people on both sides of the infirmed diabetic scenario and I've been on both sides. No deaths resulted in my experiences, though. I used to work at a nursing home and knew people (family, residents, aids, even nurses from time to time) that would sneak sweets in to diabetics. My mom did that with my dad, though he was responsible about eating sweets. They were just a treat from time to time and he could adjust his insulin intake. My mom also did it with me, and as with my dad, I was responsible about it and would tell the nurses I needed more insulin as a result. We weren't trying to fool the nursing staff or doctors. We were getting around the dieticians' and kitchen staffs' rigid restrictions.

Your situation...that's a tough one. I couldn't see why someone would make that up, not that it's impossible to imagine. There is no statute of limitations on murder in most countries, as far as I'm aware. At most this would probably be considered involuntary manslaughter, but a death was still involved.

My own conscience would force me to bring it to the attention of authorities.

 

[auntiehill]

Since the person purposefully acted in a way that would directly cause harm, that would be more than "depraved indifference." I would expect charges a bit more serious than that--more like manslaughter. I'm assuming that the elderly woman in the nursing home also did have all of her faculties.

If your story is true, it should be reported to the police. As @Scribble stated, there is no statute of limitations on murder in most places.

And why is the thread title, "Deprived interference?" Is that supposed to be funny?

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I'm not sure the moral way to handle a situation like that.

If you have any reason to think the person is committing ongoing crimes that harm people, it's less morally ambiguous.

Motive also matters. If the intent was to kill her, it's murder, if the intent was to irresponsibly make her happy realizing it was unhealthy but not really thinking it would kill her, it's possibly reckless manslaughter. And it also matters whether the woman in question had the mental capacity to know what she was doing would kill her. It makes the difference between whether she pulled the trigger or whether she just brought the gun.

Also practically it makes a difference whether you have any proof besides your word against hers.

If it were me I'd take into account whether the person is currently a positive force in the universe, and whether having her brought to justice would have a net positive effect on the universe. Would it make the family feel better, does she have people depending on her, does she actively go around hurting people now.

 

[Nakita Akita]

Since the person purposefully acted in a way that would directly cause harm, that would be more than "depraved indifference." I would expect charges a bit more serious than that--more like manslaughter. I'm assuming that the elderly woman in the nursing home also did have all of her faculties.

If your story is true, it should be reported to the police. As @Scribble stated, there is no statute of limitations on murder in most places.

And why is the thread title, "Deprived interference?" Is that supposed to be funny?

Stupid Auto correct. I was typing it at work, just a bit before I was leaving.....

 

[Nakita Akita]

I'm not sure the moral way to handle a situation like that.

If you have any reason to think the person is committing ongoing crimes that harm people, it's less morally ambiguous.

Motive also matters. If the intent was to kill her, it's murder, if the intent was to irresponsibly make her happy realizing it was unhealthy but not really thinking it would kill her, it's possibly reckless manslaughter. And it also matters whether the woman in question had the mental capacity to know what she was doing would kill her. It makes the difference between whether she pulled the trigger or whether she just brought the gun.

Also practically it makes a difference whether you have any proof besides your word against hers.

If it were me I'd take into account whether the person is currently a positive force in the universe, and whether having her brought to justice would have a net positive effect on the universe. Would it make the family feel better, does she have people depending on her, does she actively go around hurting people now.

She is mean and vindictive at work.
She first have children she supports as far as I know or anything like that.
We got along okay for years and then one day my cell phone received a phone call and apparently the Ringer was up too loud for her tastes and all hell broke loose.
For her that is. Nobody else seemed to care that much.
I'm deaf as a freaking stone so of course my phone is et to maximum in and I guess it offends her that when I got tonsil that day I had forgotten to turn it down.
I'm not involved with her personal life.

It seems it would only be my word against hers though. I don't know what proof would even be available now.
She's a total loser if she really did it.
If she really did it, I think it would have been a horrible thing to do.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

If it were me I'd take into account whether the person is currently a positive force in the universe

A person who would be telling stories like this to distress the listener doesn't sound like a positive force in the universe to me.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

She does sound awful (Of course I hesitate to judge on one side of the story). If she really did it intentionally, and there were any hope of proof, that’d be reason to say something but it sounds like no proof still exists.

The way you told the story she sounded like a friend who had a moment of vulnerability, if she really brought it up to antagonize you, then wow. But also based on the story it’s hard to tell whether it was murder, recklessness or some kind of assisted suicide. Or just some sociopathic cudgel to mess with your emotions.

I could also believe it was some sort of manipulation tactic, if her goal was to make you quit, which if true would make her every bit as awful as you are saying.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I fixed the thread title for you.

I'm not sure what state you're in, so here's the US classification for Depraved Indifference. Does that fit your impression of the events?

To constitute depraved indifference, the defendant's conduct must be 'so wanton, so deficient in a moral sense of concern, so lacking in regard for the life or lives of others, and so blameworthy as to warrant the same criminal liability as that which the law imposes upon a person who intentionally causes a crime. Depraved indifference focuses on the risk created by the defendant’s conduct, not the injuries actually resulting.

In one case, People v Register, 60 NY2d 273, 469 NYS2d 599 (1983), while exploring the meaning of "depraved indifference recklessness" the Court of Appeals ruled that intoxication is not a defense or excuse to "depraved mind murder," although it may be to intentional murder. Its analysis started with distinguishing reckless manslaughter from the "depraved indifference recklessness" necessary for murder:

"to bring defendant’s conduct within the murder statute, the People were required to establish also that defendant’s act was imminently dangerous and presented a very high risk of death to others and that it was committed under circumstances which evidenced a wanton indifference to human life or a depravity of mind. . . . . The crime differs from intentional murder in that it results not from a specific, conscious intent to cause death, but from an indifference to or disregard of the risks attending defendant’s conduct." 60 NY2d at 274.

https://definitions.uslegal.com/d/depraved-indifference/

When this person described the incident to you, were they expressing remorse because they didn't expect the person to die, or were they bragging about getting away with it?

Is there any chance you might be reading more into it because it's someone you don't like?

How many years ago was this? Does the person still work in a nursing home or any type of caregiver situation as a second job? Is the person themselves so old that prosecution might be a waste of time?

Quiz them on the situation again and see if the details of the story change. Ask them directly if they're messing with you or if it's true.

These are the kind of things you should consider before going to police.

 

[Nakita Akita]

I think it fits with depraved indifference.
Since the "phone incident " she no longer even says things like "good morning" or "excuse me " to me any more.
So I can't ask her about anything.
Although she isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. So I'm sure I could work with another person who could see if she tells them the same story.

She doesn't work with any elderly people other than being around possibly her mother. So at least that a good thing.

I think it maybe has just been too long of time since she did it.
Nobody is going to care if someone killed an old person.

I felt like when she told it to me that she felt pride that she didn't get caught. But she kept saying, "but I was just young and stupid".
I verbally agreed with Her saying she was young and dumb, but she was 19.
And that's not young.
Young would be, to me, under 16 or something, not 19.

I see her everyday at work and she gives me dirty looks and she is lazy and doesn't do good work,
Really I feel that she is a waste of oxygen, even when I got along with her I pretty much thought that she was lazy and I knew she sloughed off on her work.

My pet peeves are people that are horrible to little children, elderly people and animals,
I think all of those people should be done away with.

Maybe I'll see if the other lady can get her talking. If she tells it to her too. I'd go to the cops in a second.

 

[Gryffindorian]

Another approach would be to report this incident to management. Even if you did, they would hear only your side of the story, but they could conduct an investigation. When complaints arise, it's usually NOT management's job to confirm or substantiate the allegations, but to gather all facts. This is a serious matter, and if your colleague was telling the truth, your employer could be held liable for one of its patients' death. Talking to management would be one of the first ethical steps to take.

 

[Nakita Akita]

Another approach would be to report this incident to management. Even if you did, they would hear only your side of the story, but they could conduct an investigation. When complaints arise, it's usually NOT management's job to confirm or substantiate the allegations, but to gather all facts. This is a serious matter, and if your colleague was telling the truth, your employer could be held liable for one of its patients' death. Talking to management would be one of the first ethical steps to take.

We don't work at a nursing home.
She did before.

 

[publiusr]

Something to consider.

I have a bit of a problem with the medical model nursing home--with one Nurse Fletcher at the main desk with "inmates" under her charge.

To me a kitchen should be the base, where a person can get what they want--maybe even if it is bad for them
http://actionpact.com/household/household_model
https://www.fgiguidelines.org/wp-co.../MMP_DesignGuideLongTermCareHomes_2018.01.pdf

The medical model allows health--but no dignity

She had her candy bars, and passed away happy. I can think of worse ways to go.

 

[Gryffindorian]

We don't work at a nursing home.
She did before.

I see. If that's the case, you're not in any position to address this to your colleague's former employer. This allegedly happened years ago, and it would be different if she was still employed there. Even if you did report the incident, you have only your colleague's account of the story, if she was even telling the truth.

 

[Sibyl]

Former employer?

I'd go straight to the police or Attorney General / State Prosecutor or maybe even a news outlet. Nursing homes want to stay as far away from controversies as possible and would likely sweep it under the furthest rug in their deepest basement closet.

You know, as they said for a long time, "If you see something, say something", which I'm pretty sure includes "seeing" with your ears.

Murder is murder, no matter how long ago it was.

 

[Gryffindorian]

What if I told you that I once robbed a bank when I was in grade school in a foreign country and got away with it? You have no way of knowing whether I'm telling the truth or I just made it up.

I'm not saying even the possibility of murder isn't serious. There's no sense of urgency to jump to any conclusion in this case. It's hearsay at best. I'd take it with a grain of salt, as I always used to say back in the old days. Now it would be entirely different if this person - I shall dub her the Sweets Murderess, Konfection Killer, or Candy Slayer - was still working at the convalescent home and people were dropping dead from diabetic shock left and right.

 

[STR]

Did the old lady have dementia or otherwise compromised judgement/memory? If not, well, that's on her. She was an adult that made her own decision. Hell, a coma isn't the worst way to go, so maybe that outcome was intentional.

If she was impaired, then yeah, it's on the nurse. OP and others covered that angle already. My point is that even people in retirement homes can (don't always, but can) still retain their own agency and that deserves consideration and respect.

 

[Gary7]

What if I told you that I once robbed a bank when I was in grade school in a foreign country and got away with it? You have no way of knowing whether I'm telling the truth or I just made it up.

I'm not saying even the possibility of murder isn't serious. There's no sense of urgency to jump to any conclusion in this case. It's hearsay at best. I'd take it with a grain of salt, as I always used to say back in the old days. Now it would be entirely different if this person - I shall dub her the Sweets Murderess, Konfection Killer, or Candy Slayer - was still working at the convalescent home and people were dropping dead from diabetic shock left and right.

I agree with this. It's quite possible this person is telling a lie, or an exaggeration. Who knows.

Also, according to her this happened a long time ago. How long? Decades?

I would do nothing, for several reasons:

1. The old woman's relatives have of course moved on at this point. Do they really need to be wrapped up into the pain of knowing that someone may have contributed to her death so long ago, when she was already nearing the end of her life?
2. Murder would be very difficult to prove. If the candy was poisoned, then yes. But the old woman knowing her own condition would still eat candy despite of that... It's not much different than giving a bottle of aspirin to someone who has a migraine headache, then they overdose on the aspirin and die of internal hemorrhaging.
3. If you report this to the authorities, the woman who said this could easily deny it (a vague story from long ago) and then counter claim harassment.

But this person sounds deranged. Since you deal with them on a daily basis, I'd keep a watchful eye and your distance. Minimize your need to interact, as I expect would be what you'd want anyway (since you described her being a b-i-t-c-h).

 

[CorporalCaptain]

It's hearsay at best.

Um, no. The coworker was talking about what she herself did. She wasn't talking about what someone else did. If the coworker were to somehow testify in court about what she did, it wouldn't be hearsay. That doesn't mean it's true of course, but hearsay is something else.

 

[Nakita Akita]

Um, no. The coworker was talking about what she herself did. She wasn't talking about what someone else did. If the coworker were to somehow testify in court about what she did, it wouldn't be hearsay. That doesn't mean it's true of course, but hearsay is something else.

I asked a friend of mine that talks to her if she thought that there could be someway for her to get her to tell her the same story,
Then the murderer would have told two people.
This second person said that she would start laughing.
I wonder about people.
How could you start laughing about s murder?
People where I work are scary.
One guy retired from here last year and moved far away. I think I know why now.