Xaxxon

Xaxxon t1_itr1m1p wrote

The difference is that you have a long time to observe clearly that the thing being done is very very wrong and is slowly killing the guy after it actually starts. No one is saying the guy should have recognized the possibility of danger when they started their patrol.

After it was clear to EVERYONE that they were killing the person, you would be expected to intervene.

If the guy in your example were slowly being electrocuted over the course of multiple minutes (I know that's really not a thing) and there were a "turn off the power" button right next to everyone and they didn't push it, THEN you talk about charging (ha!) the people with a crime. Even more if instead of a worker they forced a bystander onto the electrical lines and electrocuted him.

Also, and not really relevant:

> electrocuted to death

A bit redundant. "shocked" is the word for it that doesn't require dying.

2