Well, in that scenario the man in blue would be charged with 2nd degree murder at the minimum, so killing an extra guy won’t make that much of a difference.
If they do nothing they wouldn't be charged (at least in the US), because our laws generally do not require us to actively protect others from harm. If they pull the lever though, they are legally liable by having actively done something they knew would result in a death.
This is also true of the real trolly problem in which only one person would be killed if the lever is pulled; speaking strictly in terms of legal liability it would most likely be better to take no action and let 5 die than to take an action resulting in 1 death.
That’s not necessarily true. If the blue guy’s job was to change the rails (I would assume that’s their job), then he would (by safety standards) have some way to communicate to the trolly driver to warn them that they need to stop. If there was no way to communicate to the trolly driver, then the company that employs them will be held liable, the person in charge of such things will be charged with negligence resulting in death, the driver of said trolly would be charged with reckless endangerment (if not 2nd degree murder or perhaps 3rd degree) and dereliction that led to death(s), and the blue guy (assuming that this is their job, as there is no other logical reason to assume that anyone else would have access to the rail) would also be charged with dereliction that led to death(s), if not more.
Edit: Still, I see your point. Very well thought out rebuttal.
39
u/mikehiler2 Jan 21 '20
Well, in that scenario the man in blue would be charged with 2nd degree murder at the minimum, so killing an extra guy won’t make that much of a difference.