Your story suggests that it was by accident. But this does not sound likely. Throttling takes time. Subdueing a man does not require choking.
It’s hard to say what happened at this remove, but it’s not inconceivable that a strong well-fed man could accidentally kill a weaker man he was trying to subdue. Adrenaline would tend to shut down the man’s higher brain functions and give him more strength than he would ordinarily have. Under those conditions a man might kill by inadvertent use of a blood choke or simply by compressive asphyxia. We also don’t know if the highwayman had a hidden defect that made him particularly vulnerable.
Blood chokes still take several minutes to effect brain damage/death. I find the idea of accidentally throttling someone to death fairly suspicious. Besides, if it was truly an accident then where does Browne’s guilt come from? I don’t think the story suggested it was an accident.
“If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed; but if it happens after sunrise, he is guilty of bloodshed.”
Perhaps the authors thought that actual burglary would be more common at night, and that a proprietor during the daytime would be better positioned to shout “stop! thief!” and expect it to do anything, such that if we find you with a corpse in your house at night we have fewer grounds for suspicion (of you) than if we found it during the day. The logic seems pretty similar to the presumption that a woman raped in the countryside resisted, and is therefore merely damaged goods rather than an active participant in the sexual injury to her husband or father, as opposed to women raped in the city, who have an obligation to call for help.
It’s hard to say what happened at this remove, but it’s not inconceivable that a strong well-fed man could accidentally kill a weaker man he was trying to subdue. Adrenaline would tend to shut down the man’s higher brain functions and give him more strength than he would ordinarily have. Under those conditions a man might kill by inadvertent use of a blood choke or simply by compressive asphyxia. We also don’t know if the highwayman had a hidden defect that made him particularly vulnerable.
Blood chokes still take several minutes to effect brain damage/death. I find the idea of accidentally throttling someone to death fairly suspicious. Besides, if it was truly an accident then where does Browne’s guilt come from? I don’t think the story suggested it was an accident.
You think people can’t have guilt over accidents they caused?
From the descriptions, Browne seems to’ve been something of a literalist prig. And the Bible does say ‘Thou shalt not kill.’ in pretty absolute terms.
Technically the Bible says you shall not murder. Self-defense is allowed.
What an interesting distinction.
Perhaps the authors thought that actual burglary would be more common at night, and that a proprietor during the daytime would be better positioned to shout “stop! thief!” and expect it to do anything, such that if we find you with a corpse in your house at night we have fewer grounds for suspicion (of you) than if we found it during the day. The logic seems pretty similar to the presumption that a woman raped in the countryside resisted, and is therefore merely damaged goods rather than an active participant in the sexual injury to her husband or father, as opposed to women raped in the city, who have an obligation to call for help.
I was thinking that simply due to the darkness it is more likely to accidentally kill someone at night. Your explanation is very anti-Occam.