That matters in terms of what sort of punishment you're looking at, but I don't think it matters as far as whether the hospital's failures absolve you.
If you accidentally shoot somebody and then the hospital screws up and they die, should you be on the hook for manslaughter, or just negligent injury or whatever it would be called? I'd argue it should be the former. Death is a foreseeable consequence of your negligence even if it wasn't inevitable in this particular case. This seems similar to the eggshell skull rule. Wikipedia describes a case where a person was successfully prosecuted for murder after stabbing someone who then refused a blood transfusion and died as a result.
Intent here will matter.
If he's got a gun fetish and accidentally set it off, killing someone, that's different than shooting it at someone.
He might have had a fire fetish, set one, extinguished it, and despite his intent it got out of control.
Hard to say though. Either way, I can see a stiff penalty to prevent future use of the "oops I just like fire" defense.
That matters in terms of what sort of punishment you're looking at, but I don't think it matters as far as whether the hospital's failures absolve you.
If you accidentally shoot somebody and then the hospital screws up and they die, should you be on the hook for manslaughter, or just negligent injury or whatever it would be called? I'd argue it should be the former. Death is a foreseeable consequence of your negligence even if it wasn't inevitable in this particular case. This seems similar to the eggshell skull rule. Wikipedia describes a case where a person was successfully prosecuted for murder after stabbing someone who then refused a blood transfusion and died as a result.
Oh I see. Yes that makes more sense.
The question to ask is manslaughter or first degree murder.