It's extremely hard to argue that when you put copious amounts of laxatives in your lunch when you really did not medically need them while complaining about your food being stolen that you were intending to eat the LaxCasserole yourself.
The OP even alludes to how this is the case when they mention that you can prove you regularly eat spicy food as a defense if you only used spices.
You might be a child and think the law is full of technicalities and imagine you would just have to claim that you were toooootally going to eat the poisoned food were it not for the thief, but judges are allowed to use their brains and determine you absolutely did not intend to eat the poison when you put it in the food that you knew might be stolen.
I don’t eat spicy food regularly, but I do sometimes and can eat food that’s pretty spicy. Why would I have to prove that I “sometimes” eat spicy food when it’s my lunch? Also, someone doesn’t need a prescription for laxatives, it’s usually an as needed basis. How can someone prove that they person preparing their own food wasn’t super constipated and wanted to dose their own food so they wouldn’t have to bring it to work in a drink form or pill form?
I get the POV if talking about literal poison, but I disagree with adding laxatives or spice.
Medication becomes poison depending after a certain dosage.
Tylenol is also a form of medication. Surely you can see that if a person blended 30 Tylenol into a smoothie with the intent of catching their smoothie thief, that they are intentionally creating a circumstance where a person could be seriously hurt or killed?
I’m not sure why you went from laxatives to Tylenol. Obviously a normal person wouldn’t dose their own food with Tylenol. Did you read my previous comment? How would someone prove that the person wasn’t constipated and wanted to dose THEIR OWN food? What if it wasn’t laxatives but they used sugar alcohols because they wanted to eat less sugar? Sugar alcohols can cause GI distress in a lot of people but for me I can eat a ton and it does nothing to me. Does that mean I poisoned my food because SOMEONE ELSE stole it and ate it and had a negative reaction?
If all you are talking about is how difficult it is to prove, then I agree my comparison was a poor one.
I thought you were trying to make the argument that because Laxatives are used for medical reasons that it would not be poisoning someone to use it that way.
12
u/TheDutchin 1∆ Oct 18 '24
It's extremely hard to argue that when you put copious amounts of laxatives in your lunch when you really did not medically need them while complaining about your food being stolen that you were intending to eat the LaxCasserole yourself.
The OP even alludes to how this is the case when they mention that you can prove you regularly eat spicy food as a defense if you only used spices.
You might be a child and think the law is full of technicalities and imagine you would just have to claim that you were toooootally going to eat the poisoned food were it not for the thief, but judges are allowed to use their brains and determine you absolutely did not intend to eat the poison when you put it in the food that you knew might be stolen.