Sign up for free

Podcasts > Stuff You Should Know > Short Stuff: Killing a Dead Body

Short Stuff: Killing a Dead Body

By iHeartPodcasts

In this episode of Stuff You Should Know, the hosts explore an unusual question in criminal law: can someone be charged with murder if their intended victim was already dead? Through several real-world cases from France, New York, and Australia, they examine how different courts have approached this legal puzzle.

The episode delves into the critical role of intent in criminal charges, particularly the distinction between murder and attempted murder. While it's legally impossible to murder someone who is already deceased, the perpetrator's mental state and intentions at the time of the act can still result in attempted murder charges—even if their actions could not have succeeded in killing an already-dead victim.

Listen to the original

Short Stuff: Killing a Dead Body

This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Sep 17, 2025 episode of the Stuff You Should Know

Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.

Sign up for Shortform
Short Stuff: Killing a Dead Body

1-Page Summary

Josh Clark introduces the intriguing legal concept of "murdering a dead body" and its implications in criminal law. The core debate centers on whether someone can be charged with murder or attempted murder if their intended victim was already deceased at the time of their action.

Several cases highlight how different jurisdictions have handled this legal conundrum. In France, the Monsieur Wilkins case involved Péderot attempting to kill someone who was already dead from a previous assault by another person. In New York, Melvin Delugash's murder conviction was initially overturned due to uncertainty about whether his victim was alive when shot, though the Supreme Court later emphasized the importance of the shooter's intent. The Australian case of Daniel Darrington demonstrated how courts might distinguish between murder and attempted murder charges based on the perpetrator's beliefs and intentions at different moments during an incident.

The Role of Intent in Criminal Charges

The legal system's approach to these cases reveals a crucial distinction: while it's impossible to charge someone with murder if the victim was already deceased, attempted murder charges can still apply based on the perpetrator's intent. As demonstrated in Péderot's case, if someone attacks a person believing them to be alive and intending to kill them, they can be convicted of attempted murder regardless of whether the victim was actually alive at the time. This perspective prioritizes the perpetrator's mental state and intended actions over the actual possibility of completing the crime.

1-Page Summary

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • In legal cases where the victim is already deceased, different jurisdictions handle the situation based on factors like the perpetrator's intent and actions. Courts may consider the perpetrator's beliefs and intentions at various points during the incident to determine charges like murder or attempted murder. The distinction often lies in whether the perpetrator genuinely believed the victim was alive and intended to harm them. This approach prioritizes the mental state and actions of the perpetrator in assessing criminal liability.
  • In criminal cases, the shooter's intent is crucial as it determines the severity of the charges. Intent reflects the mental state and purpose behind the actions taken. It helps differentiate between murder and attempted murder charges. Courts consider the shooter's intent to assess their culpability and the appropriate legal consequences.
  • In criminal law, the distinction between murder and attempted murder charges is based on the perpetrator's intentions and beliefs at the time of the crime. Even if the victim was already deceased, a person can still face attempted murder charges if they believed the victim was alive and intended to kill them. This differentiation emphasizes the importance of the perpetrator's mental state and intentions in determining the appropriate criminal charge. The focus is on the individual's state of mind and actions rather than the actual outcome of the crime.
  • In legal proceedings, the focus on the perpetrator's mental state and intentions is crucial in determining criminal charges. This means that the court considers what the person was thinking and planning to do when assessing their guilt. The emphasis lies on the individual's mindset and purpose behind their actions rather than solely on the outcome of the crime. This approach helps differentiate between various charges like murder and attempted murder based on the intentions of the accused.

Related Shortform Content

Do We Need a National Stand-Your-Ground Law?
Shortform Explainers

Despite recent cases of homeowners shooting people who mistakenly approached their homes, Republicans are pushing for a national stand-your-ground law allowing people who feel threatened to use deadly force. This article looks at the effect of such laws, already established in more than 30 states, on society and on crime rates.

Just Mercy
Bryan Stevenson

Over a half-century after the civil rights movement sought justice for African Americans, prominent movements such as Black Lives Matter continue fighting to expose and resist injustice. In this social landscape, Bryan Stevenson’s message is timely: The US justice system consistently denies justice to society’s most vulnerable members.

In his 2014 book, Just Mercy, Stevenson examines the justice system’s pervasive failures toward marginalized populations, especially Black Americans. To illustrate these failures, Stevenson discusses numerous criminal cases, most prominently the 1989 case of Walter McMillian, a Black man wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Alabama.

In this guide, we’ll discuss Stevenson’s analysis of the McMillian case and his evidence of extreme punishments doled out more broadly by the justice system. Moreover, we’ll consider Stevenson’s diagnosis of the root problems with the American conception of justice and his suggestions for repairing it. We’ll also examine arguments from other sources about how to improve the justice system and provide further context for the cases that Stevenson cites.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Short Stuff: Killing a Dead Body

"Murdering a Dead Body" and "Legal Impossibility" Concepts

The concepts of "murdering a dead body" and "legal impossibility" introduce fascinating quirks to criminal law, concerning the implications for charging someone with a crime that is impossible to commit.

Impossible to Murder Someone Already Dead; Perpetrator Not Chargeable

Josh Clark outlines the argument that it is legally and physically impossible to murder a dead body. Building on this point, Perdereau's defense team argued that Perdereau cannot be charged with murder or attempted murder. Their argument hinged on the premise that the act was a legal impossibility because Monsieur Wilkins was already deceased prior to the attempt, meaning Perdereau could not be chargeable for the murder.

Attempted Murder Charge Valid Even if Victim Already Dead

In contrast, opponents of the legal impossibility defens ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

"Murdering a Dead Body" and "Legal Impossibility" Concepts

Additional Materials

Counterarguments

  • The concept of "legal impossibility" might not be universally accepted in all jurisdictions, and there could be legal systems where the intent to commit a crime is not enough to constitute an attempt if the crime is factually impossible.
  • The principle of legality requires that there be a law that defines a conduct as criminal before one can be charged; if the law does not recognize an attempt on an impossible crime, then charging someone might be legally unsound.
  • The mens rea, or criminal intent, is indeed crucial in establishing guilt, but it must be accompanied by an actus reus, or guilty act, which in the case of an impossible crime, is arguably absent.
  • The punishment for an attempted crime is often less severe than for a completed crime, reflecting the legal system's valuation of actual harm caused; charging someone with attempted murder when no harm could have been caused might be seen as disproportionate.
  • There may be alternative charges that are more appropriate fo ...

Actionables

  • You can explore the nuances of intent versus action by writing a short story or scenario where a character tries to commit a crime but fails due to an unforeseen circumstance. This exercise will help you understand the complexities of criminal intent and the legal system's approach to it. For example, create a character who plans a heist but discovers the vault is already empty when they break in.
  • Start a conversation with friends or family about ethical dilemmas by presenting hypothetical situations where intent and outcome don't align. Use this as a way to delve into personal beliefs about justice and morality. An example could be discussing whether someone should be punished for planning to steal a life-saving medication they couldn't afford if they never actually commit the theft.
  • Reflect on your own de ...

Related Shortform Content

Just Mercy
Bryan Stevenson

Over a half-century after the civil rights movement sought justice for African Americans, prominent movements such as Black Lives Matter continue fighting to expose and resist injustice. In this social landscape, Bryan Stevenson’s message is timely: The US justice system consistently denies justice to society’s most vulnerable members.

In his 2014 book, Just Mercy, Stevenson examines the justice system’s pervasive failures toward marginalized populations, especially Black Americans. To illustrate these failures, Stevenson discusses numerous criminal cases, most prominently the 1989 case of Walter McMillian, a Black man wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Alabama.

In this guide, we’ll discuss Stevenson’s analysis of the McMillian case and his evidence of extreme punishments doled out more broadly by the justice system. Moreover, we’ll consider Stevenson’s diagnosis of the root problems with the American conception of justice and his suggestions for repairing it. We’ll also examine arguments from other sources about how to improve the justice system and provide further context for the cases that Stevenson cites.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Short Stuff: Killing a Dead Body

Specific Legal Cases/Precedents That Explore This Concept

This article details various legal cases from different jurisdictions that have grappled with the challenging concept of legal impossibility and the defendant's intention in crimes leading to the death of an individual.

The Monsieur Wilkins Case in France

Monsieur Wilkins' Death Sparks Debate Over Charges

In France, the peculiar case of Monsieur Wilkins involved an initial brawl with Monsieur Charot, where Charot knocked out Wilkins and then strangled him using an iron bar. Subsequently, another individual, Péderot, assuming Wilkins was still alive, attempted to kill him again. A key twist in the case arose when the medical examination revealed that Wilkins was already dead before Péderot's assault. This discovery led to intense debate over whether Péderot could actually be charged with murder or attempted murder because of legal impossibility—the fact that the victim was deceased at the time of his actions.

The Michael Geller Case in New York

Court to Decide Murder Charge In Shooting Death

An incident from New York City in 1975 features the case of Michael Geller, whose shooter, Melvin Delugash, faced murder charges. A pivotal argument in Delugash's defense was the possibility that Geller might have been dead at the moment Delugash shot him. Although Delugash's murder conviction was initially overturned because of this uncertainty, the Supreme Court later countered the argument by focusing on the shooter's intent, which remained a key factor in deciding the appropriate charge.

The Matt Scasi Case in Australia

Court to Decide: Murder or Attempted Murder Charge In Shooting

The Australian legal system was put to test in the case of Daniel Darrington and Matt Scasi. During a struggle, a gun was discha ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Specific Legal Cases/Precedents That Explore This Concept

Additional Materials

Counterarguments

  • The concept of legal impossibility in the Monsieur Wilkins case could be critiqued for potentially allowing a loophole where someone could escape murder charges due to a technicality, rather than being judged on the dangerousness of their actions.
  • In the Michael Geller case, one might argue that focusing solely on the shooter's intent could overlook other relevant factors, such as the victim's state at the time of the crime, which could be crucial in determining the appropriate legal response.
  • Regarding the Matt Scasi case, it could be ...

Actionables

  • You can explore the nuances of legal concepts by starting a book club focused on legal thrillers and court dramas. Gather a group of friends or join an online community interested in literature, and select books that delve into legal issues similar to those discussed in the cases you've heard about. As you read and discuss, pay attention to how the authors address legal impossibility, intent, and the distinction between different types of crimes. This will give you a deeper understanding of the complexities of the law in an engaging and accessible way.
  • Enhance your critical thinking skills by writing fictional short stories that involve legal dilemmas. Use the themes of legal impossibility, intent, and the fine line between different charges as central plot points. This creative exercise will not only improve your writing but also force you to think through the legal consequences of actions, much like a lawyer would. Share your stories with friends or on writing forums to get feedback and further refine your understanding of these legal concepts.
  • Develop a better grasp of intent and legal outcomes b ...

Related Shortform Content

Just Mercy
Bryan Stevenson

Over a half-century after the civil rights movement sought justice for African Americans, prominent movements such as Black Lives Matter continue fighting to expose and resist injustice. In this social landscape, Bryan Stevenson’s message is timely: The US justice system consistently denies justice to society’s most vulnerable members.

In his 2014 book, Just Mercy, Stevenson examines the justice system’s pervasive failures toward marginalized populations, especially Black Americans. To illustrate these failures, Stevenson discusses numerous criminal cases, most prominently the 1989 case of Walter McMillian, a Black man wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Alabama.

In this guide, we’ll discuss Stevenson’s analysis of the McMillian case and his evidence of extreme punishments doled out more broadly by the justice system. Moreover, we’ll consider Stevenson’s diagnosis of the root problems with the American conception of justice and his suggestions for repairing it. We’ll also examine arguments from other sources about how to improve the justice system and provide further context for the cases that Stevenson cites.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Short Stuff: Killing a Dead Body

Intent vs. Outcome In Determining Guilt For Crimes

A legal case involving an individual named Péderot brings to the forefront the nuanced debate on the importance of a perpetrator's intent versus the actual outcome in determining guilt for crimes such as murder or attempted murder.

Importance of Perpetrator's Intent

The case with Péderot hinges on whether or not he can be charged with a crime because he believed his victim, Wilkins, was alive when he attacked him. The New York Supreme Court took a stance that dismisses the concept of legal impossibility, instead emphasizing intent over the actual possibility of completing the criminal act. This is why they went ahead with a charge of attempted murder, indicating that if the perpetrator believes the victim to be alive and intends to kill, they can be found guilty of attempted murder.

There's a legal thin line between murder and attempted murder charges, closely tied to the perpetrator's mental state and the victim's condition at the time of the act.

Murder Charges Don't Apply if the Victim Is Deceased; Attempted Murder Charges Depend On Intent

In Péderot's situation, the challenge arises for the prosecution to appropriately charge him because Wilkins was already deceased when Péderot attacked. Since one cannot murder a person who is already dead, murder charges are not applicable. However, attempted murder charges rely on the perpetrator's belief ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Intent vs. Outcome In Determining Guilt For Crimes

Additional Materials

Counterarguments

  • The concept of legal impossibility is a valid legal defense in some jurisdictions, and dismissing it may not align with established legal precedents or statutory laws.
  • Emphasizing intent over the actual possibility of completing the criminal act could lead to convictions based on thought crimes, which is a contentious ethical and legal issue.
  • The distinction between murder and attempted murder is not merely a matter of intent but also requires an unlawful action towards the completion of the crime; if the victim is already deceased, some argue that the act does not constitute an attempt.
  • The mental state of the perpetrator is difficult to ascertain with certainty, and relying heavily on presumed intent could lead to miscarriages of justice.
  • The context of the initial action being in the line of duty may complicate the interpretation of subsequent actions and the associated intent.
  • The conviction for attempted murder in thi ...

Actionables

  • You can deepen your understanding of legal concepts by role-playing scenarios that explore intent versus possibility. Gather a group of friends and create hypothetical situations where someone attempts an impossible crime. Discuss how intent might be perceived in a court of law and what the outcome could be based on the principles discussed in the podcast. This activity will help you grasp the nuances of legal intent and impossibility.
  • Enhance your critical thinking skills by writing a short story that involves a character facing a moral dilemma similar to Péderot's situation. Craft the narrative to explore the character's intent and the legal consequences of their actions. This exercise will allow you to explore the complexities of intent and action in a creative and engaging way.
  • Improve you ...

Related Shortform Content

Just Mercy
Bryan Stevenson

Over a half-century after the civil rights movement sought justice for African Americans, prominent movements such as Black Lives Matter continue fighting to expose and resist injustice. In this social landscape, Bryan Stevenson’s message is timely: The US justice system consistently denies justice to society’s most vulnerable members.

In his 2014 book, Just Mercy, Stevenson examines the justice system’s pervasive failures toward marginalized populations, especially Black Americans. To illustrate these failures, Stevenson discusses numerous criminal cases, most prominently the 1989 case of Walter McMillian, a Black man wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Alabama.

In this guide, we’ll discuss Stevenson’s analysis of the McMillian case and his evidence of extreme punishments doled out more broadly by the justice system. Moreover, we’ll consider Stevenson’s diagnosis of the root problems with the American conception of justice and his suggestions for repairing it. We’ll also examine arguments from other sources about how to improve the justice system and provide further context for the cases that Stevenson cites.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free

Create Summaries for anything on the web

Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser

Install Extension
Shortform Extension CTA