Criminal Liability for Apartment Infested with Deadly Spiders? You be the Jury!

Holy Gross!  Deadly spiders.  

I was going to post the link to this story, but I’ll go ahead and post the entire article since it is small.  Per WHAS 11 news:

        WHAS11 News has learned that the Elizabethtown, Kentucky family whose apartment had become infested with deadly Brown Recluse spiders has been let out of their apartment lease.

        The management company is letting them out of their lease without the 60 day notice and 3 months rent, which is their usual policy.

        A spokesperson for the apartment complex said: 

        "The safety of our tenants is always our first priority. Management has been working with the occupants to address the problem. In the interest of arriving at the swiftest possible resolution, we have allowed the tenants to terminate their lease without penalty."

        The Stone family had already moved out of the apartment and is living with family.

At this point I would like to highlight the legitimate PR skills of the “spokesman for the apartment complex.”  Kudos for a well thought out, poignant statement concerning the complex.  You directed attention to the complex’s commitment toward safety, and didn’t once mention the INFESTATION OF DEADLY SPIDERS.  Good job.

Obviously, there is no indication that anyone was killed by the deadly spiders in the above story.  But what would happen if someone was, in fact, bitten and killed???  The question for the day is “If a landlord has knowledge that a premises is infested with deadly spiders, and they rent the premises to someone without disclosing that information, can the landlord be subject to criminal liability (assuming someone is bitten and dies).”

The first section of the KRS that we will address is the homicide section, naturally, since in our hypothetical, someone died.  KRS 507 governs criminal homicide, and in this great Commonwealth, we have four (4) types of criminal homicide:  Murder, Manslaughter in the First Degree (hereinafter, “Man1”), Manslaughter in the Second Degree (hereinafter, “Man2”), and Reckless Homicide.  In all 4 scenarios, someone dies.  In all 4 scenarios, in order to be guilty, the Defendant had to have caused the victim’s death.  The difference between them largely lies in the mental state of the Defendant, what Louisville homicide lawyers call the “Mens Rea.”

If someone dies because your conduct was “reckless,” the crime is Reckless Homicide.  Reckless Homicide is a Class D felony, which means it carries a penalty of 1-5 years in a Kentucky penitentiary.

If someone dies because your conduct was “wanton,” then the crime is Man2, depending on the circumstances.  Killing someone with the wanton operation of a motor vehicle, and leaving a child in a car in extreme heat will get you Man2, a Class C felony which carries a penalty of 5-10 years in prison.

Man1 requires intent to kill someone, but generally speaking, it means that there was a reason you killed the person that makes the killing…more…acceptable?  The typical example is when a man comes home and finds his wife in bed with another man.  He kills both of them under the extreme emotional stress of the incident.  Husband would be guilty of Man1, which is a Class B felony carrying a penalty of 10-20 years in prison.

Murder includes the intentional killing of another person, but also includes “under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life” wantonly engaging “in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person and thereby causes the death of another person.”

Back to our hypothetical about the apartment complex owner, let’s assume that the landlord does not INTEND for anyone to die.  They just really want to rent an apartment out, so they sweep the information about the infestation of deadly spiders under the rug.  Would this type of conduct be reckless?  Wanton?  Wanton conduct under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life?  This is the type of question that would be left for a jury, not a judge or lawyer, to decide.  So you tell me.  Choose an answer and leave it in the comment section with your explanation.

In order to help you decide, here are the definitions for “Wantonly” and “Recklessly” as defined by KRS 501.020: 

"Wantonly" -- A person acts wantonly with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a  statute defining an offense when he is aware of and consciously  disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that disregard thereof constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. A person who creates such a risk but is unaware thereof solely by reason of voluntary intoxication also acts wantonly with respect thereto.

"Recklessly" -- A person acts recklessly with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.

Enjoy!

If you are charged with murder, manslaughter, or reckless homicide, you need an experienced Louisville homicide lawyer.  Call Gruner & Simms, PLLC for a free initial consultation.  Don’t trust a homicide charge to a lawyer who only practices criminal defense “every once in a while.”  If you have a homicide charge in Louisville, Lexington, Frankfort, Elizabethtown, or the surrounding areas, call 502.618.4949 or visit www.grunersimms.com.  Results.  As fast as the law will allow.