The Latest: Teens may face charge after watching man drown
Source: Associated Press
Updated 4:01 pm, Friday, July 21, 2017
COCOA, Fla. (AP) The Latest on Drowning Man-Teens (all times local):
4:55 p.m.
Authorities in Florida say a group of teens who watched, laughed and made a video as a man drowned in a retention pond can be charged with failure to report a death.
Cocoa Mayor Henry Parrish III says the misdemeanor charge is at least a start in the July 9 drowning death of 31-year-old Jamel Dunn. It's generally not a crime to fail to come to someone's rescue in Florida or elsewhere in the U.S.
Cocoa police say after the drowning they discovered a group of teens recorded Dunn's drowning on video. The video was released by the state attorney's office Thursday and audio was published by Florida Today. The teens can be heard laughing at Dunn, telling him he's going die and they weren't going to help him.
Police identified and interviewed the five teens involved. Cocoa Police Chief Mike Cataloupe called their actions "utterly inhumane and cruel," but initially said criminal charges could not be filed because state law doesn't require people give or call for help when someone's in distress.
Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/The-Latest-Teens-may-face-charge-after-watching-11306105.php
dhol82
(9,352 posts)This is just mind bending. Watching someone drowning and not trying to help?
Hope they get blowback.
elleng
(130,767 posts)this is how laws are made.
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)Quick, knee-jerk responses to address public outrage tend to result in laws that aren't thought through very well with unintended consequences that surface later down the road.
Do we really need laws to compel us to help someone who's drowning?
I'm guessing the boys who watched that man drown wouldn't have done anything different had their been a law on the books.
bitterross
(4,066 posts)In the heat of the moment is not a good way to make public policy and law. It creates really bad laws like the three-strikes laws and the minimum mandatory sentencing laws.
This isn't a wide-spread problem that calls for immediate response.
radical noodle
(7,997 posts)making a law that says you must report to police if you see a person die. His family didn't know where he was, as I understand the story, while all the time these kids knew exactly where he was.
elleng
(130,767 posts)it takes time, and I certainly was not suggesting such, but rather that laws are derived from a consensus among many members of society, and that something similar should arise from this anti-social incident.
elleng
(130,767 posts)thoughtful laws that arise from thoughtful discussion among members of society.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)To know whether charges should be brought. But I am sickened every day at the loss of humanity and empathy we seem to be seeing in our society. Maybe it just gets more publicized, and this isn't new. But it feels more prevalent at all levels in our society.
question everything
(47,440 posts)Skittles
(153,122 posts)WTF IS WRONG WITH THEM???
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)They yelled at him to get out of the water in a "Dude you an idiot" kind of way and then he started yelling for help and they started laughing like "no shit you moron". Its clear they weren't taking it seriously and next thing you know the guy doesn't come up and they start debating whether to call the police.
They sounded pretty stupid. Like fucking dumb stoned kids.
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)You gonna die, one of the teenagers said in a video posted to social media.
Aint nobody fixing to help you, you dumb ass, another teen shouted as Dunn called for help.
Not one of the teenagers attempted to assist Dunn or called or help. Instead, they laughed and filmed his final moments, police said.
They just laughed the whole time, Cocoa Police Department spokeswoman Yvonne Martinez told Florida Today. He was just screaming ... for someone to help him.
When Dunn finally disappeared under water, one of the teens said flatly, Oh, he just died. The remark sparked laughter in the group.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/florida-teens-mock-film-man-drowning-disability_us_597229f3e4b00e4363df267c?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
Old Vet
(2,001 posts)That's where they will get these kids at a minimum.
BigmanPigman
(51,569 posts)I didn't watch the video bit hearing about it didn't surprise me. It did remind me of the last Seinfeld episode when they got jailed for not helping an overweight man who was getting car jacked and video taped it while making jokes instead. The "Good Samaritan" law they quoted in the show was to protect people who DO attempt to help someone and accidentally some harm is caused in some way (like while trying to save a person falling from a high place then a person gets a broken toe in the fall).
forgotmylogin
(7,521 posts)There are cases where attempting to help could worsen the problem, or put the rescuer in danger. If you don't feel confident you can pull someone safely from a burning car, you should not be required to attempt to do so.
However, recording someone on a camera phone in an accident without having also attempted to call for rescue or 911 could be interpreted as wanting to profit off of someone's misfortune, for clicks, views, or to sell the footage to a news organization.
This would apply in situations like the paparazzi who scrambled to take pictures of Diana right after the car crash instead of calling for help.
Doug the Dem
(1,297 posts)Even though the penalty for not reporting a death is probably minor, something has to be done to say loud and clear, "This is NOT okay!"
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)I am heartbroken at the utter disrespect for another persons life.
I can't imagine anyone standing by and just laughing as another human being struggles to live and then jeer at them and laugh as they filmed his death while ignoring his cries for help.
Response to sheshe2 (Reply #18)
Name removed Message auto-removed
NBachers
(17,083 posts)indifference to me.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)Like "Aggravated", "Unintentional", "Felony", or "Grand".
It's an enhancement of an existing crime. Nobody has quite yet explained what the existing crime is.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)That quote was posted on another site. While I have heard this argument from people concerning being armed, that won't help anyone who is drowning. So a person who is drowning is out of luck unless there is a civilian around willing to risk their own life because police won't help or save you?
Added danger to that risk is the fact that in Florida it is fairly common to find GATORS in it's lakes and ponds. Drown along with the other person, or possibly be eaten? Personally, I think it is better to call for help from people who know what they are doing.
So what is the point at all of calling 911 then? For the police to come after the person has drowned to just "investigate" after a death? Save a whole lot of money by eliminating 911? You are on your own?
When you have adults who think like this, are you surprised at teens like these?
LisaL
(44,972 posts)Supreme court ruled that police don't have a constitutional duty to protect.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)and stationary. Not protection from another person. So on 9/11 the Police could have just sat around doing nothing too and watched people die? Buildings are inaminate objects also. How about Firefighters? Is their legal obligation only to put out the fire? I guess they aren't legally required to carrying people out of burning buildings?
LisaL
(44,972 posts)And if you object to the supreme court ruling, I am not the one who came up with it.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)Those teenagers were in the right to not call 911? Moral is to not going swimming anywhere where there is no lifeguard? They are the only people who have the legal obligation to save a drowning person?
LisaL
(44,972 posts)X_Digger
(18,585 posts)They do so because they choose to, not because they're legally obliged to.
Legally, a cop could step over a criminal stabbing you to death in order to cross the street to get to a donut shop, and there's not a damned thing you (or likely your heirs) could do about it.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)Even in blue states like California and New York, lest you think it some backwards republican thing.
Riss v. City of New York - 1967
http://lawschool.courtroomview.com/acf_cases/10107-riss-v-new-york
Plaintiff was harassed by a rejected suitor, who claimed he would kill or seriously injure her if she dated someone else. Plaintiff repeatedly asked for police protection and was ignored. After the news of her engagement, the plaintiff was again threatened and called the police to no avail. The next day, a thug, sent by the rejected suitor, partially blinded the plaintiff and disfigured her face.
Rule of Law and Holding
The municipality does not have a duty to provide police protection to an individual. It has a duty to the public as a whole, but no one in particular.
Hartzler v. City of San Jose, 46 Cal. App.3d 6 (1st Dist. 1975)
Approximately 45 minutes later, Mack Bunnell arrived at her home and stabbed her to death. The police did not arrive until 3 a.m., in response to a call of a neighbor. By this time Mrs. Bunnell was dead.
...
(1) Appellant contends that his complaint stated a cause of action for wrongful death under Code of Civil Procedure section 377, and that the cause survived under Probate Code section 573. The claim is barred by the provisions of the California Tort Claims Act (Gov. Code, § 810 et seq.), particularly section 845, which states: "Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide police protection service or, if police protection service is provided, for failure to provide sufficient police protection service."
Nor is it just courts of the 1960's/70's..
Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales
...
The Court's majority opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia held that enforcement of the restraining order was not mandatory under Colorado law; were a mandate for enforcement to exist, it would not create an individual right to enforcement that could be considered a protected entitlement under the precedent of Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth; and even if there were a protected individual entitlement to enforcement of a restraining order, such entitlement would have no monetary value and hence would not count as property for the Due Process Clause.
Justice David Souter wrote a concurring opinion, using the reasoning that enforcement of a restraining order is a process, not the interest protected by the process, and that there is not due process protection for processes.
Frankly, the only time the courts have enforced a legal duty to protect is when one in police custody. It might be new knowledge to some, but it's always been true.
Nitram
(22,768 posts)you can't be charged for not saving someone. I assume that is because you can't be expected too risk you life for someone else. But not reporting a death IS a crime, and they should be tried and punished to the full extent of the law. If not, psychopathic teenagers everywhere will have a license to kill (just push someone in and watch them drown).
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)LisaL
(44,972 posts)In the particular case we are discussing, the man who drowned went into water by himself (there is a surveillance tape of him doing so). Apparently he argued with one of his relatives, then left home and went into the pond.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)which the person said, "If not, psychopathic teenagers everywhere will have a license to kill (just push someone in and watch them drown)."
Nitram
(22,768 posts)LisaL
(44,972 posts)So you don't have to speculate without any basis.
blueinredohio
(6,797 posts)and show their faces on t.v. or in the newspaper oops didn't mean to get them in the picture was doing a story about the courthouse sorry
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)have high levels of lead in their blood. Not that they shouldn't be punished for their behavior. I'm just curious as to how many folks are suffering from lead poisoning from their drinking water...
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)How many "funny" teen movies feature plots or subplots based on treating deceased family members like inconvenient luggage? Answer: a lot. So this kind of thing doesn't surprise me at all. These kids might well be perfectly normal 95% of the time, but at this particular moment decided they were going to be hi-lariously callow techno-teens like in the movies. Not so funny anymore is it.
burrowowl
(17,632 posts)They are cowardly scum, they can't even call 911!
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)If the police have no duty to save anyone, then those teenagers calling 911 is moot.