Say that Reuven is at the batting cages. After the machine turns off, Shimon flips it back on without Reuven knowing. A ball whacks Reuven in the head. Is Shimon liable for the resulting death?

What about an extreme case, in which Shimon programmed a robot to turn on the batting cage for him?

The Gemara in Makkos 8a notes that for a murder that is a gerama it is a machlokes whether one is liable, but a gerama of a gerama is patur according to everyone. How far removed does flipping on the circuit make one? Is that still considered direct enough?

  • 1
    similar judaism.stackexchange.com/q/60171/759
    – Double AA
    Feb 19 '17 at 18:57
  • Note a sword is also a machine
    – Double AA
    Feb 19 '17 at 18:57
  • It's probably parallel to judaism.stackexchange.com/q/38014/759
    – Double AA
    Feb 19 '17 at 18:59
  • Is your extreme case that he, say, programmed the batting machine to turn on at noon and Reuven happened to be in the line of fire, or that he programmed it to turn on when its built-in camera recognized Reuven? Feb 19 '17 at 19:02
  • @DoubleAA Technically yes, but anything that you're holding is an extension of you. Throwing something at someone is your power. Throwing a clump of dirt at a tree which knocked down a cluster of dates is the case in Makkos in which there's an argument.
    – DonielF
    Feb 19 '17 at 19:09

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .