Interruption of life-saving processes and proof of causality beyond reasonable doubt: a case analysis

Abstract

This study aims to examine the issues around the proof of causality in cases where there is an interruption of lifesaving process, whether by the patient or a third party. To achieve this purpose, an analysis will be conducted on three real cases: the “queue jumping” scandal, the Göttingen transplant case and the Madrid Arena case, all of which share the common feature of an interruption in a lifesaving causal process by a medical professional. This report will begin by examining the main conceptual questions related to this complex causal category, starting with its definition as either a crime committed through action or omission, which imples different forms of evidence collection. In view of this, we will proceed to address the issue of defining the standard of proof and its problems. In view of this, we will proceed to address the issue of defining the standard of proof and its problems, including, the issue of criminal policy inefficiency or the violation of the principle of in dubio pro reo. Finally, it will analyze the most appropriate theory for the criminal procedural system and whether medical activity should receive special treatment for the purposes of criminal liability.