Stepfather Murders Molested Teen

What is the name of your state? Tennessee
I am an author and began writing a book about a mother whose daughter died in her arms seventeen years ago.The daughter was hospitalized in her second trimester with was believed to be Guillian Barre syndrome.She was diagnosed with this syndrome because it causes muscle weakness and extreme fatigue.The medical reports from the hospital say they called it Guillian Barre because the daughter told the doctors she had not been exposed to any heavy metal poisoning. Aresenic has the exact same symptoms.
Upon returning home after recovery with an excellent prognosis for full recovery she began to display the same symptoms again within hours. She began vomiting as before, 911 was called, in the meantime a chiroprator at the scene took a steak knife and cut her throat open slicing her jugular vein under the guise of helping her breath. Within minutes she bled out and died. The emergency crew were on the scene in an appropriate time period but it was too late.She was cremated within hours of her death by the same stepfather/chiropractor. Later it was discovered that the chiropractor/stepfather was the father of the daughter's baby.

We have taken all this to the lead dectective at the justice center and have been told he could claim justifibly the good Samaritan law and be free of prosecution. The police feel he is guilty of murder and the policeman on the scene asked the prosecutors at the time to arrest him to no avail. Would the good samaritan law cover such a overt act as I have described to you here. Would the fact that he is a chiropractor make any difference, as he is not allowd by law to dispense medications or perform surgery? Any help would be appreciated.

The basis for any criminal liability would be based on 'good faith' exception provided in 63-6-218 of the TSA.

It sounds like the prosecutor could not prove a lack of 'good faith' and therefore could not dispel the shield of the statute.

(b) Any person, including those licensed to practice medicine and surgery and including any person licensed or certified to render service ancillary thereto, or any member of a volunteer first aid, rescue or emergency squad which provides emergency public first aid and rescue services, who in good faith:




I think a question would be what kind of certification did he have to 'assist' in that way. Did he have any first aid training? The fact that he was the baby's father wouldn't necessarily show malice. He could have been trying to save her. I think a lot of what you are looking for would depend on other factors.

djohnson said:

(b) Any person, including those licensed to practice medicine and surgery and including any person licensed or certified to render service ancillary thereto, or any member of a volunteer first aid, rescue or emergency squad which provides emergency public first aid and rescue services, who in good faith:




I think a question would be what kind of certification did he have to 'assist' in that way. Did he have any first aid training? The fact that he was the baby's father wouldn't necessarily show malice. He could have been trying to save her. I think a lot of what you are looking for would depend on other factors.

Click to expand...

Read the ENTIRE statute.

I have. I actually teach it as I teach CPR/AED and other things for the American Red Cross. I know what we have been advised to teach per our attorneys. The statute only covers individuals doing acts to the best of their training. Just because someone knows CPR doesn't mean they can do open heart surgery. If the step father wasn't trained then they may have something. If he was trained as a first responder (commonly this is something that could be taught) then they don't. I just don't think it's a cut and dried answer without knowing more information.

The statute only covers individuals doing acts to the best of their training.

Click to expand...

Wrong! The act says "Any person, including..." That means any person who comes to the aid of another and renders that aid.

I think it's time you sat down with the attorney's who advised you or seek other opinions.

From what you are saying, any person can go home tonight and when their spouse complains of chest pains (which is probably heart burn) can take a knife and try to do open heart surgery? That makes no sense. Think about what you are saying. It does cover anyone who acts within their ability. The word ability is what has to be defined. You have your take on it is fine. I believe ours or every disgruntled spouse would use this defense and have a grand time cutting up people.