Opinions on this legal 'Presentation'?

RVTECH · Jan 12, 2018

Last July I posted about a person I know who has a family member charged with murder in a negligent shooting situation. I was told yesterday this person's lawyer is going to be presenting evidence to the DA the EMTs who responded were 'negligent' in their duties and in fact caused his death as he 'should have' survived the shooting in the hope of getting the murder charge reduced to manslaughter so bail can be set. Seems like a stretch to me given the distance they had to travel to the site and the conditions the were working under. Any EMTs or other medical professionals ever hear of, or experience anything like this?

IronMonster · Jan 12, 2018

I am a first responder, both firefighter and EMT. I can tell you that lawsuits against first responders are not uncommon. There is a very specific set of things that have to take place to show negligence on the part of a EMT.

We will assume there was a duty to act by the EMT so that condition has been met.

First fault being a breach of duty, that the EMT did not act within an expected and reasonable standard of care, Second, damages, the patient was physically or psychologically harmed in some noticeable way and finally there must be a reasonable cause and effect relationship between the breach of duty and the damages suffered.

What that all boils down to is that if the EMT acted within their scope of practice and in good faith (basically doing what anyone with similar training and certifications would do) they could not be found negligent. Even if not doing something resulted in the paitents death (if they did do something that directly caused the paitents death, they would still not be negligent if it could be proven that its what any other EMT would have done in the same situation)

Sometimes when we are all that is there and the paitent needs advanced life support measures we might know what to do but not have the authorazation or certification to do it. Our QRU is a BLS service even though we have advanced EMT's and even a paramedic on staff. The paramedic on staff can only provide BLS or basic life support because that is all our service is authorized to do... So by law, he cannot provide care he is trained to proivde even if it might save someones life. If he did he would be fired on the spot and his certifications revoked and probably never be able to work in pre hospital care again.

All an on duty EMT is expected to do is to try and help and not do anything they are unauthorized to do. Most EMT lawsuits with any meat are aginst EMT's who did something stupid. Dropped a paitent, told them a lie, did something outside there licenced scope of practice

In your example I don't think they could claim negligence without first a criminal or civil conviction against the EMT's who responded. If it were me and I was being thrown under the bus without proof of negligence I would have my department lawyers go after the lawyer for defamation and slander to stop the testimony as that is exactly what it is without basis.

The Heretic · Jan 12, 2018

Sounds flawed to me.

Someone shoots someone and it isn't murder because first responders were not able to save the person shot?

The shooting is the proximate cause of the death, not the response.

Weak - very weak.

Greenbug · Jan 12, 2018

Sounds very weak, probably should fire that attorney and get a better one.

WALawyer · Jan 12, 2018

A defense lawyer's job is to present any plausible argument to help the client. If there is an issue of causation, then there's no reason why that shouldn't be brought up and argued.

If I shoot you in the leg and then the ambulance comes and runs you over and kills you, why am I responsible for murder?

Keep in mind that while IronMonster's response is helpful, it is not directly on point as the question presented does not involve a civil suit, but a defense to a criminal charge. The elements and burdens are different.

The Heretic · Jan 12, 2018

WALawyer said:
A defense lawyer's job is to present any plausible argument to help the client. If there is an issue of causation, then there's no reason why that shouldn't be brought up and argued.

If I shoot you in the leg and then the ambulance comes and runs you over and kills you, why am I responsible for murder?

First responders do not have a duty to respond at all (having been one). A first responder would have to be negligent in making the injury worse, not in being unable to save a person (which is a common problem).

Like I said, weak, very weak IMO. If I were a judge or DA/ADA, I would not buy it. If I were on a jury I would not buy it either - at least not on the surface.

Sure, if a first responder makes the injury worse, then that is negligence and possibly a contributing factor, but I have not heard any evidence of that. To me, it sounds like a Hail Mary play.

Oathkeeper1775 · Jan 12, 2018

I don't fit the OP's description of a F/R professional, but I will share my comment as if I was a member of a grand jury or trial juror...

The burden of proof to shift any blame of the death onto the First Responders, would have to fall-upon the Defendant who caused the initial incident.

What did the First Responders fail to do; that was in their capabilities to do?

Did they block medical care and let him bleed out like the Arizona Marine....?

RVTECH · Jan 12, 2018

What did the First Responders fail to do; that was in their capabilities to do?

I do not know the details of this part and didn't know it was even an issue until I heard yesterday about the lawyer making this presentation. I do know however the person died later in the hospital and not while In the care of the first responders.
There is nothing to suggest they did anything other than:

acted within their scope of practice and in good faith (basically doing what anyone with similar training and certifications would do)

WALawyer · Jan 12, 2018

The Heretic said:
First responders do not have a duty to respond at all (having been one). A first responder would have to be negligent in making the injury worse, not in being unable to save a person (which is a common problem).

Like I said, weak, very weak IMO. If I were a judge or DA/ADA, I would not buy it. If I were on a jury I would not buy it either - at least not on the surface.

Sure, if a first responder makes the injury worse, then that is negligence and possibly a contributing factor, but I have not heard any evidence of that. To me, it sounds like a Hail Mary play.

There hasn't been any evidence of anything. This thread is completely devoid of any meaningful explanation of what happened. My point was that it's just not as simple to say "that's BS" without knowing all the facts.

mrblond · Jan 12, 2018

So let me get this straight. a man shoots and kills a person and somehow its not his fault? AND the lawyer thinks its a good idea to ruin someone else life to get this person off?. This guy needs to run for office with honesty and integrity like that.
Now as I have watched every episode of Law & Order I am a expert on legal matters. The Jury will laugh at this lawyer and point at his tiny penis then vote the dude guilty.
now if the guy is found guilty, the lawyer should do the time with him