The topic of crime and business is an interesting one and one cannot even fathom that there are people in business that would actually kill for whatever cause, but one cannot fathom even more the idea of killing for money which is probably why someone would kill. Hence, the idea of murder in the corporate is best believed in Hollywood. However, according to the New York Times, this idea is being given more of a consideration than in the past, because seemingly, courts have struggle with the premise that the corporation as living and breathing. Yet, their acts, as such, should find someone to blame.
E.R. Shipp (1985) wrote:
For years, the courts rejected the notion that a corporation could be charged with a crime. Since it had no mind, it could not be said to have had intent. Gradually it was accepted that a corporation can be held criminally liable for the conduct of agents acting as employees, or for violations of antitrust or regulatory laws. But the idea of corporate ”personhood” stopped short for murder – the killing of one person by another. (Shipp, 1985, para. 1).
I can look at the healthcare industry as a corporate entity and say that many people have been murdered because of intentionally sending people home to die this act being a crime against society. In this instance, the corporation is a privately owned medical facilities, or rather, for profit medical entities. By intent as Seaquist (2013) wrote, that intent does not mean that the harm was intentional,” but that there was harm done which caused damage (Seaquist, 2013). However, one can still say that there is intent when someone is sent home while hospital knows that surgery is of the utmost importance in whether a person lives or dies.
For example, a woman has a heart attack for the third time, and the doctors knowing that she has blockage in her heart that can ultimately kill her decide that because she had no insurance send her home with pills that they tell her will dissolve the clot. This is not malpractice in the sense that no treatment is done, but an intent that would cause harm had the woman died. However, she is alive and well today thanks to healthcare reform which allows all people adequate care without being turned away for inability to pay. Hence, had the woman died, in my opinion this would be a crime, not only against her but against society; in which, she is not the only one with that experience.
Today what would be the legal grounds involved if the perhaps a death or injury claim is brought forth by the family since this type behavior is illegal? Well for one it is a breach of the First Amendment. [See: You’re on the clock: Doctors rush patients out the door].
As far as crime against business, I think stealing from the company is a crime. Stealing, as Seaquist (2013) stated is conversion. She wrote: “If the defendant interferes with someone’s personal property to such a degree that it is ruined or lost, then this is conversion. The tort of conversion consists of permanently depriving the owner of personal property of its use and enjoyment through theft or destruction.” (Seaquist, 2013).
I don’t know if this is the same thing, however, a Texas prosecutor was killed, because a former Justice of the Peace was disgruntled over being fired for stealing computers from the court house, and not only did he kill the prosecutor, but he and his wife killed police chief and his wife in their home as well [See: Death Penalty Sought in Case of Killing of Texas Prosecutors].