NEGLECT OF
ELDERLY OR DISABLED PERSONS
[N.J.S.A. 2C:24-8] model jury charge
(Defendant)
is charged with neglect of [SELECT AS
APPROPRIATE] [an] elderly or disabled person[s]. This conduct is prohibited by a statute
providing:
A person having a
legal duty to care for or who has assumed
continuing responsibility for the care of a person 60 years of age or
older or a disabled adult, who abandons the elderly person or disabled adult or
unreasonably neglects to do or fails to permit to be done any act necessary for
the physical or mental health of the elderly person or disabled adult, is
guilty of a crime…
To
find (defendant) guilty of violating this statute, the State must prove beyond
a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:
1. That, on or about ____________ (date),
__________ [name] was [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE] [60 years of age or older
OR a disabled adult];
2. That,
on or about ____________ (date),
(defendant) knew that __________ [name] was [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE] [60 years of age or older OR a disabled adult];
3. That
(defendant) [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE]
[abandoned __________ (name) or unreasonably neglected to do or failed to
permit to be done any act necessary for the physical or mental health of
__________ (name).];
4. That (defendant) had a legal duty to care
for, or had assumed continuing responsibility for the care of, ____________
(name).
[CHARGE IF APPROPRIATE]
5.
That the defendant’s [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE] (abandonment of __________ (name) or
unreasonable neglect to do or failure to permit to be done any act necessary
for the physical or mental health of ________________ (name) was not done
solely for the reason of providing or permitting to be provided nonmedical
remedial treatment by spiritual means by prayer alone in lieu of medical care, in
accordance with the tenets and practices of ________________ (name’s)
established religious tradition.
The
first element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that,
___________ (name) was [CHOOSE AS
APPROPRIATE][60 years of age or older, OR a disabled adult]. “Disability” means physical disability,
infirmity, malformation or disfigurement which is caused by bodily injury,
birth defect or illness including epilepsy and other seizure disorders, and
which shall include, but not be limited to, any degree of paralysis,
amputation, lack of physical coordination, blindness or visual impediment,
deafness or hearing impediment, muteness or speech impediment or physical
reliance on a service or guide dog, wheelchair, or other remedial appliance or
device, or any mental, psychological or developmental disability, including autism spectrum disorders, resulting from anatomical, psychological,
physiological or neurological conditions which prevents the normal exercise of
any bodily or mental functions or is demonstrable, medically or
psychologically, by accepted clinical or laboratory diagnostic techniques. Disability shall also mean AIDS or HIV
infection.[1] An
adult is any person 18 years of age or older.
The
second element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that
(defendant) knew that __________ (name) was [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE][60 years of age or older, OR a disabled
adult].
A
person acts knowingly with respect to the nature of his/her
conduct or the attendant circumstances if he/she
is aware that his/her
conduct is of that nature, or that such circumstances exist, or he/she
is aware of the high probability of their existence. A person acts knowingly as to a result of his/her
conduct if he/she
is aware that it is practically certain that his/her
conduct will cause such a result.
Knowing, with knowledge, or equivalent terms have the same meaning.
Knowledge or knowingly is a
condition of the mind that cannot be seen and can be determined only by
inferences from conduct, words or acts.
A state of mind is rarely susceptible of direct proof but must
ordinarily be inferred from the facts. Therefore, it is not necessary that the
State produce witnesses to testify that an accused said that he/she
had a certain state of mind when he/she
engaged in a particular act. It is
within your power to find that such proof has been furnished beyond a
reasonable doubt by inference, which may arise from the nature of defendant’s
acts and conduct, from all that he/she
said and did at the particular time and place, and from all the surrounding
circumstances.
The
third element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that
(defendant) [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE] abandoned ___________ OR unreasonably
neglected to do or failed to permit to be done any act necessary for the
physical or mental health of __________ (name).
“Abandon” means the willful desertion or forsaking of an elderly person
or disabled adult.[2]
For purposes of this offense,
with regard to the meaning of “abandon”, the terms “desertion” or “forsaking”,
refer to a situation which was intended by the actor to be permanent as opposed
to merely temporary.[3] In the context of this charge, “willful” means
knowingly or with knowledge.[4] A person acts knowingly with respect to the
nature of his/her
conduct or the attendant circumstances if he/she
is aware that his/her
conduct is of that nature, or that such circumstances exist, or he/she
is aware of the high probability of their existence. A person acts knowingly as to a result of his/her
conduct if he/she
is aware that it is practically certain that his/her
conduct will cause such a result.
Knowing, with knowledge, or equivalent terms have the same meaning.
Knowledge or knowingly is a
condition of the mind that cannot be seen and can be determined only by
inferences from conduct, words or acts.
A state of mind is rarely susceptible of direct proof but must
ordinarily be inferred from the facts. Therefore, it is not necessary that the State
produce witnesses to testify that an accused said that he/she
had a certain state of mind when he/she
engaged in a particular act. It is
within your power to find that such proof has been furnished beyond a
reasonable doubt by inference, which may arise from the nature of defendant’s
acts and conduct, from all that he/she
said and did at the particular time and place, and from all the surrounding
circumstances.
The
phrase, “neglected to do,” means the same as the phrase, “fails to do.” In order to determine whether the alleged
failure to care for, and/or failure to permit care for, __________ (name), was
unreasonable, you need to understand that the failure to exercise reasonable
care constitutes negligence, which is a gross deviation from the standard of
care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor’s situation.
A
person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he/she should be aware of a substantial and
unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his/her
conduct. The risk must be of such a
nature and degree that the actor’s failure to perceive it, considering the
nature and purpose of his/her
conduct and the circumstances known to him/her, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a
reasonable person would observe in the actor’s situation.
The fourth element that the State
must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that (defendant) had a legal duty to
care for, or had assumed continuing responsibility for the care of ____________
(name). A person having a legal duty for
the care of a person, or who has assumed responsibility for the care of a person, includes any person who has assumed
responsibility for the care, custody or control of another or upon whom there
is a legal duty for such care. One who
has assumed the responsibility for the care of a person includes anyone who
assumes a general and ongoing responsibility for the person and who establishes
a continuing or regular supervisory or caretaker relationship with the person. [5]
[CHARGE IF APPROPRIATE]
The
fifth element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that the
defendant’s [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE]
(abandonment of ____________ (name) or unreasonable neglect to do or failure to
permit to be done any act necessary for the physical or mental health of
___________ (name) was not done solely for the reason of providing or
permitting to be provided nonmedical remedial treatment by spiritual means by
prayer alone in lieu of medical care, in accordance with the tenets and
practices of ____________ (name’s) established religious tradition. Again, “neglect to do” means “failure to do.”
If you find that the State has proved every element of
the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant
guilty. If you find the State has failed
to prove any element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must
find defendant not guilty.
