Facts :

• Therefore, The victim entered Oak Haven under the supervision of Daniel Thomas 
• Then Tomas gets permission from his parents to discipline him 
• Thomas and another supervisor take the victim to the edge of the campus, lower his pants and tie his hands behind his back, then spank him with a rubber hose for 15 to 30 minutes. 
• They obtain permission to further discipline the victim.  
• On September 30, they take the victim to the same location, tie him with a rope and beat him with a rubber hose lined for 45 minutes, resulting in 30 to 100 strokes
• 2 days later – the victim had flu symptoms that persist to death 
• Clark did an autopsy and said that the victim’s legs were twice their normal size, that the cause of his death was acute pulmonary edema and that the trauma to the leg produced an “crush syndrome.” 
• Thomas was charged with second degree murder 
• The Jury of the first judgment found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter 
• The defendant then appealed. 

Holdings :

People v Geiger 10 Mich.App. 339, 159 N.W.2d 383 (1968),

In this case, the defendant had struck his wife two or three times with his open hand and pushed her to the ground in such a manner that she bumped her head against the car. The defendant picked her up and put her in his car. Urgent medical attention was needed but the defendant did nothing until after 6- 8 hours had passed.

In Geiger the medical cause of death was “aspiration of the gastric contents into the air passages with resultant shock, asphyxia, collapse and pulmonary edema’ ” (essentially choking on her own vomit after the beating).

The pathologist who performed the autopsy testified he thought that the blows to the head or side to the head or side of the face caused the minor brain damage which contributed to diminution of laryngeal reflexes, allowing the asphyxiation, and had it not been for the blows, the victim would have been able to vomit and remove her stomach contents in a normal fashion. 

People v. McFee, 35 Mich.App. 227, 192 N.W.2d 355 (1971),

In this case, the defendant over a period of several hours, inflicted a severe beating upon a 12-year-old boy resulting in particles of partially digested food to become stuck in the vocal cord causing a cardiac arrest from the coughing reflex, the pathologist testified that in his best medical judgment there was a definite relationship between the bruising and the boy's death. 

Judgement :

In both Geiger and McFee the Court found the prosecution to have established a sufficient causal relationship. The present case is similar to these cases. In the present case the

pathologist testified that the trauma to the victim's legs caused the chain of events that led to the victim's death and that causation was not only medically probable but Medically likely. In People v.Geiger, supra, the Court quoted with approval from 26 Am.Jur., Homicide, s 52, p. 195, wherein it states:

“It is not indispensable to a conviction that the wounds be necessarily fatal and the direct cause of death. It is sufficient that they cause death indirectly through a chain of natural effects and causes unchanged by human action.” A similar analogy was made by the Court in McFee.

Such is the case here. Death was medically likely to have been caused by the beating through a chain of natural effects and causes unchanged by human action. Pulmonary edema resulted and the victim choked to death on his own vomit. Sufficient evidence of causal relationship was established by the prosecution. 

Party's arguments

Appelant's arguments :

1. claimed that the prosecution failed to establish the malice element of second degree murder. 

2. The appellant claimed that the prosecution failed to establish the elements of involuntary manslaughter.

3. The appellant claimed that the trial court erred by allowing evidence of the first beating to be admitted.

4. MOST COMPLEX POINT OF APPEAL : The defendant claims that the prosecution failed to present sufficient evidence of the causal connection between the defendant’s acts and the victim’s death. 

The Court's arguments :

1. the intent to kill may be implied where the actor actually intends to inflict great bodily harm or the natural tendency of his behaviour is to cause death or great bodily harm. In the present case, the defendant's savage and brutal beating of the decedent is amply sufficient to establish malice. He clearly intended to beat the victim and the natural tendency of defendant's behaviour was to cause great bodily harm. 

2. Involuntary manslaughter may be based on the failure to perform a legal duty.  The defendant was a supervisor of Oak Haven, stood in a position of authority over the victim and, by talking with the victim's parents and obtaining their permission to discipline the decedent, he directly and voluntarily assumed a parental function, and stood in a position of Loco parentis to the decedent.

Under such circumstances, the defendant's beating of the victim coupled with his failure to provide medical attention, when the decedent was unable to obtain some himself, violated the defendant's legal duty of care for the victim. The elements of involuntary manslaughter were adequately established. 

3. holding that proper procedure was followed and that it was properly admitted as a like act tending to show the defendant’s motive, intent, the absence of mistake or accident on defendant's part. 

4. MOST COMPLEX POINT OF APPEAL : referring to two cases = People v Geiger and People v McFee.