Question 6(1 point)

Saved

A dentist and his wife were separated, and the dentist had weekend visitation rights with their six-year-old daughter. One weekend, the dentist had tickets to a football game on Sunday and did not want to give them up. The dentist asked his father to watch his daughter while he was at the game. The father agreed. That Sunday, the dentist dropped off his daughter at her grandfather's house. The father had a house with a beautiful yard that bordered a small river, which was generally very shallow and had almost no current. The only time that the river rose was when the dam upstream periodically released excess water for hydroelectric generation. According to the charter for the hydroelectric dam, the electric company was required to give nearby residents 30 days' notice of these periodic water releases. However, the electric company had failed to provide any such notice for several years. The grandfather let the child play outside in the backyard while he watched the football game on television. He stepped outside several times during the game to check on his granddaughter, who was playing on the banks of the river. Unbeknownst to the grandfather, however, the electric company suddenly performed a water release. As a result, the river rose exceptionally rapidly, and the child drowned. The grandfather is charged with criminal homicide. What is his best defense?

Question 6 options:

A)

His omission to act cannot result in criminal liability.

B)

The death was the result of the negligence of the company that owns the hydroelectric dam.

C)

He was not informed of the water release as required under the charter for the hydroelectric dam.

D)

He was not the child's parent.