The following situation is based on a true incident earlier this year on the Kenai Peninsula. But I don’t have all the facts; so let’s treat it as a hypothetical case. This is not an essay about partisan politics, but about an idea and a principle.

Jeb sells heroin to Zeb. Zeb dies from an overdose. The police arrest Jeb and try him not only for selling heroin but also for manslaughter. In effect, the cops are making the case that Jeb is partially responsible for Zeb’s death.

You’re on the jury. You have incontrovertible evidence on videotape and the testimony of several eyewitnesses that Jeb sold the heroin to Zeb. So you vote to convict Jeb as a drug dealer.

Do you also convict him of manslaughter? In other words, do you assign him some of the blame for Zeb’s death or do you take the position Zeb is entirely responsible for his own death because no one forced him to buy the drug and to take so much of the drug that it killed him?

So, you usual suspects who aren’t shy about expressing your opinions, let’s hear from you on this one.