Site navigation

A wealthy stranger has no legal duty to provide food to B, did not create B's danger, and does nothing…

Section 3(4) extends acts to illegal omissions, and section 2(15) links an illegal omission to a legal duty; mere capacity to give charity creates no such duty, so "No,…

Choose your answer

A wealthy stranger has no legal duty to provide food to B, did not create B's danger, and does nothing to cause or worsen it. A merely declines to give charity; B later dies of starvation. Does A's wealth and failure to give charity alone establish homicide liability?

Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer B

Section 3(4) extends acts to illegal omissions, and section 2(15) links an illegal omission to a legal duty; mere capacity to give charity creates no such duty, so "No, these facts alone do not establish a homicidal act or illegal omission". Accordingly "Yes, murder follows automatically from an ability to help", "Yes, culpable homicide follows whenever aid would have prevented death" and "Yes, every morally blameworthy omission is legally equivalent to causing death" are wrong. A person under a legal duty to provide sustenance, like the jailor in the section 3 illustration, presents a different case.

Practice for these exams

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic