Duty to act when a defendant has created a danger
A person who creates a dangerous situation may be under a duty to take reasonable steps to avert that danger.
Let's say, hypothetically, that a person incites a mob into sedition and insurrection using lies. And after the mob attacks, destroys property, kills some police officers and continues to stand in defiance of the government, the person who incited the mob takes no steps to quell the insurrection and refuses to retract the lie, or to take steps to calm the mob by telling the truth.
Is that person criminally negligent?
What if that refusal to retract the lie continues, hypothetically, even after that person has left office and no longer has the power to pardon. Is that person criminally negligent for any failure to act that occurs and continues to occur after the person has left office?
What about other people who repeat the lie and refuse to correct it? Are they also criminally negligent?
Is a failure to utter a truth after uttering a lie, still a lie?
Just wondering.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Intentional conduct that is wrongful or unlawful, especially by officials or public employees. Malfeasance is at a higher level of wrongdoing than nonfeasance (failure to act where there was a duty to act) or misfeasance (conduct that is lawful but inappropriate).
