Cory Doctorow reports via Boing Boing
Ross Compton, a 59-year-old homeowner in Middletown, Ohio called 911 in September 2016 to say that his house was on fire; there were many irregularities to the blaze that investigators found suspicious, such as contradictory statements from Compton and the way that the fire had started.
In the ensuing investigation, the police secured a warrant for the logs from his pacemaker, specifically, "Compton's heart rate, pacer demand, and cardiac rhythms before, during, and after the fire".
[...] The data from the pacemaker didn't correspond with Compton's version of what happened.
[...] [The cops] subsequently filed charges of felony aggravated arson and insurance fraud.
Cory links to coverage by Network World.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday February 04 2017, @08:06PM
So, yes, I would say that intent to stop or neutralize with no regard to survivability is a distinction without difference.
The concealed carry instructors around here basically teach: do not reveal your weapon unless you intend to fire it, do not fire your weapon unless you intend to kill. Basically, keep it hidden until you're sure you need to kill the other guy. Now - at some point in the lecture they probably get into the "intent to stop or neutralize" vs kill distinction, but they way they teach it is: shoot to kill, do not kneecap, do not fire warning shots, do not think you are going to frighten the other party into submission, you should only draw your weapon if you intend to immediately fire and kill the person who is threatening your or another's life.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/24/7408365/