Too bad I’m not teaching criminal law this semester, as this case would surely be a topic of discussion. From the Associated Press:
Darrell Roberson came home from a card game late one night to find his wife rolling around with another man in a pickup truck in the driveway.
Caught in the act with her lover, Tracy Denise Roberson — thinking quickly, if not clearly — cried rape, authorities say. Her husband pulled a gun and killed the other man with a shot to the head.
On Thursday, a grand jury handed up a manslaughter indictment — against the wife, not the husband.
The husband has two possible defenses. First, he could be acting under the heat of passion, which would reduce a murder charge to voluntary manslaughter. This would not, however, justify a failure to indict him. He would just be liable for a lesser crime than murder. Second, he could be acting in defense of his wife. This would be a full defense, and it would be the most plausible reason why the grand jury declined to indict him. The facts in the AP story are ambiguous as to whether he would be entitled to a claim of defense of others:
When Tracy Roberson cried that she was being raped, LaSalle tried to drive away and her husband drew the gun he happened to be carrying and fired several shots at the truck, authorities said.
If Darrell Roberson shot LaSalle at a time when he was fleeing and when Roberson believed his wife was no longer in danger, then his defense of others claim would fail. It is not clear whether his wife was still in the truck at the time he shot the man.
The case against Tracy Roberson is more interesting. The facts suggest that she falsely cried out rape since she appeared to be having an illicit affair with LaSalle (though this doesn’t necessarily mean that she wasn’t being raped on this occasion):
The December night before the shooting, Tracy Roberson sent LaSalle a text message that read in part, “Hi friend, come see me please! I need to feel your warm embrace!” according to court papers. LaSalle apparently agreed. . . .
His wife also was charged with making a false report to a police officer — for allegedly saying she was raped — and could get up to six months behind bars on that offense.
The wife might be guilty of manslaughter if she recklessly cried out rape and it caused LaSalle’s death. However, the difficulty will be proving causation — it must be reasonably foreseeable that by crying out rape, it would result in her husband shooting LaSalle. Proving causation when another person must make an independent decision about whether to act can be tricky, as that person’s decision often breaks the chain of causation. More facts are needed for a better analysis, but the case certainly presents a very interesting scenario.
Originally Posted at Concurring Opinions
* * * *
This post was authored by Professor Daniel J. Solove, who through TeachPrivacy develops computer-based privacy training, data security training, HIPAA training, and many other forms of awareness training on privacy and security topics. Professor Solove also posts at his blog at LinkedIn. His blog has more than 1 million followers.