Earlier this week a story came out from Cocoa, Florida that inspired much emotion and debate about what the law should require of bystanders witnessing a person in danger of dying. Five teens (ages 14 -18) witnessed 32-year-old Jamel Dunn struggling to stay afloat in a pond, and as Dunn cried out for help, the teens merely laughed at him while recording him drowning on their cell phones. Dunn had walked into the lake of his own volition following an argument with his fiancée. No attempt was made to assist Dunn directly by the teens, and none of them contacted emergency services, all the way up to and beyond when Dunn went under the surface and never came back up. It wasn't until 5 days later that Dunn's body was recovered as other residents saw his body afloat in the pond. However, the teens had shared their video with many people and posted it on social media, and the police and Dunn's family quickly came to learn about it. It's somewhat of a graphic video, but you can see it here:
The video of course sparked outrage, especially because police said that in the state of Florida there is no law that requires a person to provide aid or to even contact emergency services, so that what the teens did in the video was completely legal. This sparked much debate about whether there should be a law requiring providing aid, or even just contacting emergency services, or if things should remain as-is. Those in favor of such a requirement often point to maritime law that requires boat owners to provide aid, when reasonable and safe to do so, to people found adrift at sea. People were referencing 46 U.S. Code § 2304, which states:
Quote (46 U.S. Code § 2304)
(a)
(1) A master or individual in charge of a vessel shall render assistance to any individual found at sea in danger of being lost, so far as the master or individual in charge can do so without serious danger to the master’s or individual’s vessel or individuals on board.
(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to a vessel of war or a vessel owned by the United States Government appropriated only to a public service.
(b) A master or individual violating this section shall be fined not more than $1,000, imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both.
However, no such equivalent law exists in the case of Jamel Dunn, and so the teens didn't commit a crime in this regard. The police wanted to make sure that the teens had to account in some form or another for their actions though, so they sifted through Florida law to find something that would apply, and they did. It's a misdemeanor in Florida to not report a death to the district medical examiner, and since the teens never reported Dunn's death they'll be found guilty of violating this law, which comes with a punishment of a fine of $1,000. This is all from a Florida Statute, which says:
Quote (Florida Statute)
406.12 Duty to report; prohibited acts.— It is the duty of any person in the district where a death occurs, including all municipalities and unincorporated and federal areas, who becomes aware of the death of any person occurring under the circumstances described in s. 406.11 to report such death and circumstances forthwith to the district medical examiner. Any person who knowingly fails or refuses to report such death and circumstances, who refuses to make available prior medical or other information pertinent to the death investigation, or who, without an order from the office of the district medical examiner, willfully touches, removes, or disturbs the body, clothing, or any article upon or near the body, with the intent to alter the evidence or circumstances surrounding the death, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
Enraged by this story and feeling that a $1,000 fine isn't sufficient, many people are wanting to draft and push legislation that either would legally require people to provide aid or to at the very least contact emergency services. What are you thoughts, PaRD? Should there be a legal duty to provide aid or to contact aid? Or, should the laws remain as-is, and this is merely a matter of ethics, but not one of legality?