Actually, that scenario sounds an awful lot like self defense to me. Jack was going to kill Jill if she didn’t do something about it.
Exactly. Humans have a preservation instinct, and I think the law should protect that, no matter how innocent the person is.
Agreed. Jack was going to die regardless. Jill saved herself from going down with him.
Self-defense doesn’t apply because Jack didn’t do anything illegal. There’s no such thing as a self-defense claim against lawful behavior, even if it’s lawful behavior that threatens your safety.
That said, this case probably wouldn’t be prosecuted (assuming there was a witness), if for no other reason than because a jury would very likely sympathize with her decision, and because the incident as told just intuitively seems far more like “tragic accident” than “murder”.
It hardly seems fair, considering you’d be hard pressed to find someone who doesn’t value their own lives and those of their family above strangers.
Isn’t this the same problem? Again you’re not weighing Jack against Jill, you are weighing Jack against both Jack and Jill.
I’d also argue that you have to weigh Jack’s life against the lives of both Jack *and* Jill, since Jack wasn’t going to magically be okay if he brought Jill down with him.