Heiniger-Net

Suicide or murder?

At the 1994 annu­al awards din­ner giv­en by the Amer­i­can Asso­ci­a­tion for Foren­sic Sci­ence, AAFS Pres­i­dent Don Harp­er Mills astound­ed his audi­ence in San Diego with the legal com­pli­ca­tions of a bizarre death. Here is the story.

On 23 March 1994, the med­ical exam­in­er viewed the body of Ronald Opus and con­clud­ed that he died from a shot­gun wound of the head. The dece­dent had jumped from the top of a ten-sto­ry build­ing intend­ing to com­mit sui­cide (he left a note indi­cat­ing his despon­den­cy). As he fell past the ninth floor, his life was inter­rupt­ed by a shot­gun blast through a win­dow, which killed him instant­ly. Nei­ther the shoot­er nor the dece­dent was aware that a safe­ty net had been erect­ed at the eighth floor lev­el to pro­tect some win­dow wash­ers and that Opus would not have been able to com­plete his sui­cide any­way because of this.”

Ordi­nar­i­ly,” Dr. Mills con­tin­ued, “a per­son who sets out to com­mit sui­cide ulti­mate­ly suc­ceeds, even though the mech­a­nism might not be what he intended.”

That Opus was shot on the way to cer­tain death nine sto­ries below prob­a­bly would not have changed his mode of death from sui­cide to homi­cide. But the fact that his sui­ci­dal intent would not have been suc­cess­ful caused the med­ical exam­in­er to feel that he had homi­cide on his hands.

The room on the ninth floor whence the shot­gun blast emanat­ed was occu­pied by an elder­ly man and his wife. They were argu­ing and he was threat­en­ing her with the shot­gun. He was so upset that, when he pulled the trig­ger, he com­plete­ly missed his wife and the pel­lets went through the a win­dow strik­ing Opus.

When one intends to kill sub­ject A but kills sub­ject B in the attempt, one is guilty of the mur­der of sub­ject B. When con­front­ed with this charge, the old man and his wife were both adamant that nei­ther knew that the shot­gun was loaded. The old man said it was his long-stand­ing habit to threat­en his wife with the unloaded shot­gun. He had no inten­tion to mur­der her — there­fore, the killing of Opus appeared to be an acci­dent. That is, the gun had been acci­den­tal­ly loaded.

The con­tin­u­ing inves­ti­ga­tion turned up a wit­ness who saw the old couple’s son load­ing the shot­gun approx­i­mate­ly six weeks pri­or to the fatal inci­dent. It tran­spired that the old lady had cut off her son’s finan­cial sup­port and the son, know­ing the propen­si­ty of his father to use the shot­gun threat­en­ing­ly, loaded the gun with the expec­ta­tion that his father would shoot his moth­er. The case now becomes one of mur­der on the part of the son for the death of Ronald Opus.

There was an exquis­ite twist.

Fur­ther inves­ti­ga­tion revealed that the son [Ronald Opus] had become increas­ing­ly despon­dent over the fail­ure of his attempt to engi­neer his mother’s mur­der. This led him to jump off the ten-sto­ry build­ing on March 23, only to be killed by a shot­gun blast through a ninth sto­ry window.
“The med­ical exam­in­er closed the case as a suicide.”

Exit mobile version