I could see him being put on trial for 'desacration' or something akin to that.(if there is even a law dealing with that kind of thing)

As a general rule though, if someone gets caught cheating and the cheaters' lover is killed....well, we all know the consequences of our actions so Not Guilty.

We all know that if you go messing with another guys girlfriend, you're risking an ass beating. You sleep with someone's wife...well, better be prepared for the worst case senerio of her husband coming home and committing a crime of passion.

possible
 

I would try to get the bitch on involuntary manslaughter, she put him at risk with the sex, and failed to act. in CL i could nail her easily for negligence but I think I cold even get her for reckless in the MPC. For the dude if he had a good defense they might be able to get away with a legal impossibility, but I would claim it to be a factual impossibility and get him for attempted murder. It
but he could argue something about catching your wife in bed bullshit making some kind of heat of passion killing, or that he suffers from extreme emotional disturbance from all the relationship problems, so he would probably only get attempted voluntary manslaughter. one would think

Glad I'm not a lawyer. I am way too naive and idealistic. And I would miss a lot of details. I do like to present arguments and debate, but not at that level. I could never be a defendant.

What if the guy had just tried to punch the man lying on the bed, or to stab him, but upon grabbing or punching or stabbing he would have immediately noticed the guy was dead? Would a method requiring contact result in a different verdict than a gunshot that could be fired at a distance?

Holy bump, Batman!

Seven years!

I've only been in law school for 2 whole weeks so bear with me!

I think this is a trick question. As we all know there are two factions of law in America, civil and criminal courts. The main difference I would say is the type of standard of proof that they use to decide their cases.

In Criminal law, as we all know from movies and Law & Order, the PROSECUTOR must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person is GUILTY. In Civil law the PLAINTIFF'S council must only win by the preponderance of evidence showing that the defendant is LIABLE.

Lets look at the question again, shall we? " The question is this. Will John be held liable for attempted murder and violent assault even though the body was already dead?"

I believe the answer is NO, because a person will not be held liable for a criminal matter just the same way that someone is not going to be found guilty for a civil one. That's the best I could after 3 Torts classes since I haven't taken Crim Law yet... :D

Council = a group or assembly, like a student council.
Counsel = an advisor, like a lawyer.

Spelling counts in law school. So does not writing like you did just now. Some attorneys might also argue that a more serious difference between civil and criminal courts is that one has the ability to deprive people of their liberty.

Happy gunning!

This reminds me, I found one of the rarest species of gunners in one of my classes - a 3L gunner. It's hilarious and sad at the same time.

Oh, that's great! We had a couple of those last year - and one of them was in a seminar class. The professor actually had to devise this system where you got a yellow index card for the first time you talked, a blue one for the second time you talked, and once you had lost your cards you couldn't talk again until everyone else was out of cards. It reminded me of fourth grade and it still didn't shut him up.

That is a fantastic system; I wish some of the professors at my school used it.

I'm in a 4-year program (evening students do 4 years instead of 3), so I'm interested to see if I can find a 4L gunner.

Here's a law school exam question, have fun with it!
 

I hadn't really intended to take a blogging break while I was on break. It just worked out that way.

But now it's time to head back. The line-up for this semester: Criminal, Constitutional, Labor and Intro to IP. I'm pretty excited about the line-up. The crim reading was more interesting than I expected and everything else looks pretty good.

I got out my job search letters and bought a new suit. Now I just need someone to offer me an interview.

Basically, I'm ready to go back. Refreshed and well-rested. And the Eagles won today, so I'm in a good mood.

He's guilty of attempted voluntary manslaughter or murder depending upon whether he was adequately provoked or had the time to cool off.

For attempt, a factual impossibility, e.g., the victim already being dead, is not a defense. All you need is the intent to do the specific bad thing and a significant step in that direction.

Bravo...this is a fairly decent attempt at spamming.

What I find interesting is the phrasing of the question. Specifically, "WILL John be held liable ... ?"
The answer to that question is 'We do not know!'
The question should read "CAN John be held liable?"
That presents a very different situation. One cannot presume to know the result of a jury decision in a jury trial or a judge's finding in a summary trial. One can consider whether or not the charges are possible. This would depend on the laws in force in the jurisdiction in question.
Just to add one small wrinkle, before you can have a murder you must first have a homicide. Once you have a homicide you can determine whether the circumstances support a charge of murder or some lesser derivative charge or charges. There are unfortunately several "correct answers" again depending on circumstances and jurisdictions. First thing to ask, is there a homicide?
If yes follow the obvious path to determine what fits the circumstances. If no then are other charges possible? If there are do they apply to the basic query posed by this law school exam question.
Have fun!

is that OK law or U.S. code? Is there U.S. code for murder/manslaugther/killing another human? I'm full of questions today, sorry.

It's common law, I think.

Probably MPC and Oklahoma as well though.

Even though this thread originated 8 years ago, was there a possibility that "Heart Attack Man" could have been revived with a defibrillator by paramedics before Gun Man pumped the guy full of lead and snuffed that possibility?

Can the guy be charged with performing an indignity to a dead body by pumping the guy full of lead? (Yes, I realize that, at the moment of the lead-pumping, he was not aware that guy was already dead).

What was the answer in the end? I didn't read every response. Tell me what page of the thread, if the answer is, in fact, posted.

My answer is right. Valkyrie's goes into better detail as to why.