She was only trying to poison her husband, an older relative, but his mom used the milk she poisoned, made yoghurt and served to the family.
Not saying she did the right thing but there's a lot of wrong things happening here.
Was she right to poison the husband? Inmaterial to me. I’m willing to leave that between them. Where I see an issue is what happened next.
Many rules and such exist because there are statistically or reasonably foreseeable accidents that can occur. This is the main reason “vigilante justice” generally isn’t legal. Mistakes happen. Accidents and misunderstandings. People get her and die who aren’t involved directly in things and you can undo that or fix a death. So even if the husband deserved to die, if she’d Intended to kill the whole family because they deserved it- wether that was true or not, there would be intent and the law or peers can decide if she was justified. The fact they died on accident shows negligence and lack of care to me. Indiscriminate killing. That can’t be justified.
Right or wrong- when you kill some own with purpose there is at least some argument there is a reason. When you kill on accident, someone is dead not because of even a possibility of wrong doing or “justice” but because you are not competent. She failed to be competent and we know that because people she didn’t intend to get hurt were hurt the same as if she hadn’t meant to poison anyone and accidentally put a household chemical in their food. She knew she was handling deadly substances around people and didn’t take proper precautions to avoid unintentional harm. If she truly feels no remorse for it that would be heinous.
Imagine if you made a salad with bad (poisonous) mushrooms and then carelessly left it out and someone ate it and died. Regardless of the fact you never told them they could or abound eat it and it was an accident- wouldn’t you feel bad about it?
Not saying she did the right thing but there's a lot of wrong things happening here.
Many rules and such exist because there are statistically or reasonably foreseeable accidents that can occur. This is the main reason “vigilante justice” generally isn’t legal. Mistakes happen. Accidents and misunderstandings. People get her and die who aren’t involved directly in things and you can undo that or fix a death. So even if the husband deserved to die, if she’d Intended to kill the whole family because they deserved it- wether that was true or not, there would be intent and the law or peers can decide if she was justified. The fact they died on accident shows negligence and lack of care to me. Indiscriminate killing. That can’t be justified.
Imagine if you made a salad with bad (poisonous) mushrooms and then carelessly left it out and someone ate it and died. Regardless of the fact you never told them they could or abound eat it and it was an accident- wouldn’t you feel bad about it?