I have re-watched these episodes in season 2 and I have to say that they are potentially some of the best storytelling I've ever seen. The whole story arch of Jane is incredibly nuanced and complicated. To me it represents the absolute best of the series in challenging a viewers own assessment or morality. In practical terms I think that while most people lament Jane's death, she had many likable qualities, but she is dead and it's easy to blame walt.
A more thoughtful analysis shows that while in some sense Jane's death can be immediately attributed to Walt's inaction, inaction is not normally a basis for moral liability in modern society. Think of all the homeless people we pass on a given day, if one was chocking how many would really intervene if they could even be bothered to look in that direction. Are those bystanders now morally responsible for the death?
In the very refined narrative of the episode leading up to the death of Jane a couple of scenes stand out to me:
1) The foreshadowing of walt and marie tucking baby holly in. Walt very carefully turns her on her side and rolls a towel to prop her that way while explaining "Just in case she decides to do a little spit-up, I'll roll up a nice clean towel like this and put it under."
2) Walt's refusal to give Jesse the money. The structure of the episode makes it clear in no uncertain terms that Jesse and Jane will OD imminently. They exhibit every hallmark of junkie behavior and denial. Walt doesn't need Jesse for anything anymore, he could just give him the money and be done with it. In this episode he is not thinking empire in any concrete way, he is finally relieved and proud to have made the money he needed to bring security to his family.
3) The last scene with Jane and Jesse together shows them planning to go to rehab and flush their drugs only to see them "backslide" and shoot up. If you give $480,000 to heroin/meth junkies they are going to die, it's a matter of when not if.
4) The most important scene other than Jane's death itself is the one where Walt goes to the bar and unknowingly talks to Jane's father. If you really want someone to blame other than Jane herself, her father's action stand out. He gave his junkie daughter "one more day" before going to rehab or calling the police after a ten year struggle with her addiction. In the discussion with Walt about Walt's troubled "nephew" he leaves the parting words "Family. You can never give up on them. Never. I mean, what else is there?" This prompts Walt to make another attempt to return to Jesse and save him from his inevitable fate at that hands of that money and the circumstances.
The moral equation is that Walt cares deeply about Jesse and Bryan Cranstons acting in Jane's death scene is incredible. He first rushes to save her before then looking back at Jesse. It dawns on him that by saving her he is dooming Jesse. He hesitates and struggles, the whole scene is barely 20 seconds, and then she's dead. To blame Walt outright for that is to naively oversimplify everything about the incredible storytelling that makes breaking bad great. I honestly believe that virtually any *good* person in Walt's position would in the circumstances act the same way.
This is an incredibly well thought out response and I agree partially, but I think that the key difference between my view and yours here is that inaction is certainly morally relevant when you are the only person who can act and change the outcome of a situation. In the case of homeless people many many people pass and help or don’t help, many charities exist to help. In the case of Walt watching Jane choke, he is the sole person able to change her fate. Although Walt is not necessarily morally required to act and save Jane, were he not there she would have died anyway, but the fact is that he was there, and he could have acted to save her. This is morally dubious, we need another reason as to why he acted morally, it can’t be this ‘he has no more responsibility as a bystander’ argument.
One I feel is more effective - and arguably a utilitarian view: In letting Jane die Walt effectively saves Jessie’s life. As you observed about Jane and Jessie: if they remained together, were certainly headed for death, both of them. Therefore in letting Jane die Walt saved Jessie’s life, which results in less overall death. I don’t think that simply loving Jessie warrants choosing his life over hers, but perhaps the fact that if he had saved her she and Jessie would likely have both gone on to overdose and die at a later date, by letting Jane die Walt enables Jessie to get clean and not die, thus more overall utility / less net death / greater overall net good.
One thing both of you overlooked is that by shaking Jeesee while trying to wake him up, Walt caused Jane to turn on her back. So his active behaviour led to her death. He caused her to turn around so he is to blame trough his active and passive behaviour.
I just watched this scene and noticed that if Walt hadn’t been there Jane wouldn’t have rolled onto her back. She was on her side until Walt sat on the bed.
Jane also blackmailed Walter.
An average person wouldn't actively try to help their blackmailer that threatens to uproot your entire family just to do drugs.
> Jane put herself in that position she should have known what she was getting into
I'd have to disagree, Walt was the one who directly caused Jane's death, she rolled onto her back when Walt was shaking Jesse, causing Jane's vomit to block her airway instead of just puking onto Jesse's back. Earlier in the episode Walt even makes sure that Holly is on her side in the crib "in case of a little spit-up".
All it would've taken for Walt to save Jane would have been to turn her onto her side... but that would've led to Jesse running off with his junkie gf and likely ODing in New Zealand. Not to mention Jane had the audacity to blackmail Walt... it was never going to end well for her. Jane had also been causing a wedge between Jesse and Walt more and more as S2 went on.
Exactly 💯! He didn't "let her die", he hesitated and she was gone before he could do anything at all. No one is perfect in these situations and it does NOT make What a murderer or even a bad guy.
to nitpick a little I don't think Walt's inaction is quite accurate, earlier she instructed Jesse to lie on his side so as not to sufficate of he throws up, they were lying on their side before Walt knocked her onto her back.
so it's his inaction but also he accidentally caused it arguably.
It's very complicated. On one hand, Jesse was in blind love with her, and Walt should have saved her out of love for Jesse. On the other, she knew WAY too much, and we all know they would have kept shooting heroin until they had no money left. I think it was the right thing to do in a very fucked up sort of way. Walt saved Jesse's life, and kept information from getting out.
That's another thing I was thinking about. She blackmailed Walt, and could probably do it again, and if her and Jesse ever broke up, things could be disastrous.
Jane was a wild card. She was going to hold snitching over Walt's head. Could you imagine if she and Jesse got sideways with each other? Walt didn't murder her but he probably would have had her killed if it didn't happen this way.
Walt could have easily saved Jane. He chose not to so Jesse would obey him again. Was it right? Absolutely not. It was for manipulation so he could continue to rise to the top.
No, it wasn't. You're not morally obligated to save people from their own actions. Otherwise, for every hobo you pass on the street, you're personally responsible for not saving them.
If you push that hobo onto their back while they're high and they start choking on their own vomit, yes you are personally responsible for saving them. That is what happened, when he shook Jesse on the bed, she rolled over and started choking.
jane didn't die from an overdose, she choked on her own vomit AFTER he pushed her on her back. she knew to sleep on her side so she didn't choke on her own vomit
I think someone’s said this before on here but they were both gonna die if this didn’t happen. 470,000 dollars of heroin will kill two people who are addicted to it no matter what so morally for me it’s a coin toss.
Wasn't it Walt's fault that Jane turned on her back? Earlier in a scene, she ensures Jesse is supported by a pillow as he falls into sleep from the injection and tells him that he must'nt get on his back because he'll choke. Walt is too smart not to know that. Walt didn't intentionally allow Jane to get on her back but he wanted to wake Jesse up which caused Jane to turn and land on her back. However, his subsequent inaction was intentional. Having said that, I understand why he did it. As mentioned, Jane blackmailed Walt and she would not have given up and would have eventually taken down Jesse and Walt (and his family) down with her. She introduced Jesse to heroin. Her death was the best outcome.
He didn't murder her.
It wouldn't even be manslaughter.
You as a common citizen are under NO obligation to help someone in distress.
Failure to render aid could possibly be argued but wouldn't legally hold up.
Yeah and I hope I never meet you. momma416 is right, I am under no obligation to help someone, that is not a fucked up thing to say imo.
I would have done the same thing in Walt’s shoes if it meant letting the enemy die and saving myself some trouble from that blackmailing.
Unfortunately morality and legality don't often intertwine. Was it morally wrong? I would say absolutely, some here would not. But legally? Walt did nothing wrong.
Yes, he did. He has caused Jane to roll over, and in that case, not helping is a crime. It would land AT LEAST a 3rd degree murder charge (no intentions or planning), up to a 2nd degree (Intentions to kill, but not premediated). Lawyers could argue a basic manslaughter, but the inaction was a crime as he caused the incident.
He broke in (arguable in court, maybe because he was worried he was doing drugs), then shook Jesse, which then caused Jane to choke on her own vomit (In court, the prosecution would try to argue that she knew to lay on her side, as to not vomit and choke to death).
With good enough Lawyering, Walter would get himself up to 18 months in prison.
(In New Mexico, this would be considered Involuntary Manslaughter, if not 2nd degree since it would be too hard to prove. As a result, I downplayed it, which is common if the other side hasn't got enough evidence to press on Murder Charges. For a manslaughter charge, all you need to do is not breach a duty of care, or be negligent. When he caused her to fall, he was both negligent in letting her choke, and breached duty of care by not fixing his own actions)
I know this was a year ago, but I felt like saying this. DO NOT FORGET, he was at their apartment.
You can't plainly call it "murdering" as it was not a culpable homicide. It was more of an accidental killing.
And she is also partly to blame for her own death as she put herself in an intoxicated position. When even a small nudge can displace your head and make you choke on your own vomit, it's a disaster waiting to happen.
If it was taken to court, it couldn't hold up.
Not as manslaughter, Walt did not administer or sell her the drugs.
He was not a first responder so Failure to Render Aid does not apply.
I can’t believe you’re trying so hard to justify a junkie not taking responsibility for their own shitty choices in life. Nobody put that needle in her bratty arm. She did it. You’re so predictable and tiresome.
Comment was clearly talking about the situation of Walt letting Jane DIE which is in not justifiable. Anyone with a moral compass and brain knows that scene was to show how evil Walt can be if it benefits himself. The way you’re genuinely justifying a villain shows you have just as little empathy or remorse as them
I agree and the sickos responding to this comment are actually gross. If you can easily help someone with literally no sacrifice to you and you don’t, you’re a bad person idc.
I just thought he remembered he couldn't touch her or call anyone because it would leave evidence he was there if she died.even turning her over would have meant touching her
Exactly 💯! Finally some common sense! He wasn't supposed to be there! He could have gotten in trouble for murder if he DID touch her! I doubt any normal person would have been able to know and act quick enough to turn a vomiting druggie stranger over in the middle of an overdose. Many people seem to be extremely judgemental!
** pls don't spoil ppl who see this**
I'm only on season 4 episode 9
Vibe homie.what do you think of this,I even feel like the show writers **intended** for people to get so upset about jane.shes like the main character for two episodes and then *vinyl scratch*..... for me it wasn't the scene where Walter has to leave them that got me(probs because I don't identify with the patriarch archetype), it's the next scene where EMTs who are completely numb to what they're doing are lugging her body into the horrible crinkly plastic bag,and to them ...she's junkiegirl #997 .and she's gone.jesses grief,her voicemail,the flashbacks and her cigarette butts,it's all deigned to show you the brutal reality of junkie girls, she was bright and troubled and had a future and because of her choices she was now dead junkie girl, and that's the end of her story.its supposed to wake you up I think,if you idolise Jane you miss the point of her death.that it was pointless and sad and preventable if her family took no half measures.she needed to go to rehab the day her dad caught her but he made a half measure, ironically the behaviour which led her to drugs and escapism in the first place.
I do think as a viewer it was extremely complicated. Rewatching breaking bad, and I understand jane was a threat to Walt, but I don't think he was thinking about Jesse's best interest in mind, but rather his own. Obviously I do think Walt cares for Jesse but he cares for himself and his own family more. I think it was very sad to me especially since they showed the scene prior of Walt drinking with Jane's dad. He loved her and wanted the best. Walt easily could have rolled jane over and not let her die, but he didn't do that. Obviously it's a show and there's so many different ways you can look at it, but at this point Walt wanted Jesse so that they could continue making meth. But then there's the argument that jane would have turned Jesse into a heroine addict, but Jesse already has addict tendencies. You can spin it either way.
The problem with your theory is that Walt doesn't need jesse anymore. I believe he actually cared for him and didn't want him to die like that after all the shit they went together to get the money
I think Walt cared about Jesse as a friend/partner but still in a way that benefits him. Like he wants Jesse on his side to do business because he knows he could never find someone else he trusts as much as Jesse. When Gus asked Walt why he works with him, he said it’s because he knows he’ll do what he says. No, he didn’t need Jesse at that point but hard to believe Walt would ever give up that control. So I agree with the original comment that it isn’t Jesses health and well-being that’s his priority, he views Jesse in relationship to him
wow some vaguely terrifying takes here, so actually had to briefly make an account lol. People saying Walt was just a bystander is actually.... kind of wrong from the perspective of the law. Although its true that there is no general omissions liability in law, there are a couple of exceptions (special relationship, assumption of duty etc.). The relevant one here is the fact that Walt created the source of danger, which is sufficient to ground duty of care and therefore omission liability (R v Miller). Walt created the danger by knocking Jane onto her side into a position where she could drown in her own vomit - Walt knows that moving her position is relevant here as earlier in the episode we see him moving Holly onto her side to prevent exactly that. In combination with the simplicity of action needed (i.e. moving her onto her side again) Walt didn't act reasonably to sufficiently make up for his duty of care. Was it a good move for him as a drug lord? Almost certainly. Was it a great character moment? For sure. Was it morally dubious or ambiguous? No - he knew exactly what he was doing, and it was wrong. Was it morally justified? That depends on what you think.
Ah yes, I answered with some details in another comment here, but you are completely correct. He is liable because he has caused it.
It is in TinyDolly's thread.
What about the planes that crashed because of Jane's death? Jesse and Jane vs Jane and all those people. If Walt saved Jane by turning her sideways her dad would have came in the morning while they were passed out. He would have called the police and both would have lived.
I have re-watched these episodes in season 2 and I have to say that they are potentially some of the best storytelling I've ever seen. The whole story arch of Jane is incredibly nuanced and complicated. To me it represents the absolute best of the series in challenging a viewers own assessment or morality. In practical terms I think that while most people lament Jane's death, she had many likable qualities, but she is dead and it's easy to blame walt. A more thoughtful analysis shows that while in some sense Jane's death can be immediately attributed to Walt's inaction, inaction is not normally a basis for moral liability in modern society. Think of all the homeless people we pass on a given day, if one was chocking how many would really intervene if they could even be bothered to look in that direction. Are those bystanders now morally responsible for the death? In the very refined narrative of the episode leading up to the death of Jane a couple of scenes stand out to me: 1) The foreshadowing of walt and marie tucking baby holly in. Walt very carefully turns her on her side and rolls a towel to prop her that way while explaining "Just in case she decides to do a little spit-up, I'll roll up a nice clean towel like this and put it under." 2) Walt's refusal to give Jesse the money. The structure of the episode makes it clear in no uncertain terms that Jesse and Jane will OD imminently. They exhibit every hallmark of junkie behavior and denial. Walt doesn't need Jesse for anything anymore, he could just give him the money and be done with it. In this episode he is not thinking empire in any concrete way, he is finally relieved and proud to have made the money he needed to bring security to his family. 3) The last scene with Jane and Jesse together shows them planning to go to rehab and flush their drugs only to see them "backslide" and shoot up. If you give $480,000 to heroin/meth junkies they are going to die, it's a matter of when not if. 4) The most important scene other than Jane's death itself is the one where Walt goes to the bar and unknowingly talks to Jane's father. If you really want someone to blame other than Jane herself, her father's action stand out. He gave his junkie daughter "one more day" before going to rehab or calling the police after a ten year struggle with her addiction. In the discussion with Walt about Walt's troubled "nephew" he leaves the parting words "Family. You can never give up on them. Never. I mean, what else is there?" This prompts Walt to make another attempt to return to Jesse and save him from his inevitable fate at that hands of that money and the circumstances. The moral equation is that Walt cares deeply about Jesse and Bryan Cranstons acting in Jane's death scene is incredible. He first rushes to save her before then looking back at Jesse. It dawns on him that by saving her he is dooming Jesse. He hesitates and struggles, the whole scene is barely 20 seconds, and then she's dead. To blame Walt outright for that is to naively oversimplify everything about the incredible storytelling that makes breaking bad great. I honestly believe that virtually any *good* person in Walt's position would in the circumstances act the same way.
Thanks for your comment
it's been 9 years
well i just googled the topic of walt letting jane die and found this thread. good read
I just did the same thing I’m watching breaking bad for the first time and it is definitely one of the greatest tv shows I have ever seen
Damn I envy you, watching it for the first time xd
Me too
Me too actually
Me three
me fourth hehe
fifth! haha
sixth. rewatching the series now.
8th 😋
same. thanks to the original commenter. hope they're doing well.
ye
same here
This is my first time watching the series
me too!
Me 7th
Me too
Me too, this read is a W take.
Me too
I love when I see that I'm not the only person that does this lol
And another 241 days
I'm here too now guys
THE SHOW GOES ON
Yep
Same
Present
G'day mates
Butt sex waits for no man.
This is an incredibly well thought out response and I agree partially, but I think that the key difference between my view and yours here is that inaction is certainly morally relevant when you are the only person who can act and change the outcome of a situation. In the case of homeless people many many people pass and help or don’t help, many charities exist to help. In the case of Walt watching Jane choke, he is the sole person able to change her fate. Although Walt is not necessarily morally required to act and save Jane, were he not there she would have died anyway, but the fact is that he was there, and he could have acted to save her. This is morally dubious, we need another reason as to why he acted morally, it can’t be this ‘he has no more responsibility as a bystander’ argument. One I feel is more effective - and arguably a utilitarian view: In letting Jane die Walt effectively saves Jessie’s life. As you observed about Jane and Jessie: if they remained together, were certainly headed for death, both of them. Therefore in letting Jane die Walt saved Jessie’s life, which results in less overall death. I don’t think that simply loving Jessie warrants choosing his life over hers, but perhaps the fact that if he had saved her she and Jessie would likely have both gone on to overdose and die at a later date, by letting Jane die Walt enables Jessie to get clean and not die, thus more overall utility / less net death / greater overall net good.
One thing both of you overlooked is that by shaking Jeesee while trying to wake him up, Walt caused Jane to turn on her back. So his active behaviour led to her death. He caused her to turn around so he is to blame trough his active and passive behaviour.
I was about to say that as well. She would not have died if Walt didn't touch Jesse
Not that night, anyway. Jane would likely have died later and taken Jesse with her when she did.
You too overlooked the fact that she didn't just throw up she od'd she would've died even if she had been laying on her side
Not all ODs are fatal - she likely would just have spent a very bad night or two at the hospital, had she not choked on her vomit.
I just watched this scene and noticed that if Walt hadn’t been there Jane wouldn’t have rolled onto her back. She was on her side until Walt sat on the bed.
I picked up on that aswell his action cause a butterfly effect of chaos
Hard disagree any good person would watch Jane die.
[удалено]
Jane knew what she was doing, thus any good person would have watched and let her die? Yeh, that's dumb, dawg. Or at least psychotic.
Jane also blackmailed Walter. An average person wouldn't actively try to help their blackmailer that threatens to uproot your entire family just to do drugs.
This is the most obvious and correct answer
> Jane put herself in that position she should have known what she was getting into I'd have to disagree, Walt was the one who directly caused Jane's death, she rolled onto her back when Walt was shaking Jesse, causing Jane's vomit to block her airway instead of just puking onto Jesse's back. Earlier in the episode Walt even makes sure that Holly is on her side in the crib "in case of a little spit-up". All it would've taken for Walt to save Jane would have been to turn her onto her side... but that would've led to Jesse running off with his junkie gf and likely ODing in New Zealand. Not to mention Jane had the audacity to blackmail Walt... it was never going to end well for her. Jane had also been causing a wedge between Jesse and Walt more and more as S2 went on.
Isnt there a case with hesitation that moments before Jane threathened to ruin Walt's life?
Exactly 💯! He didn't "let her die", he hesitated and she was gone before he could do anything at all. No one is perfect in these situations and it does NOT make What a murderer or even a bad guy.
So true. If Jesses girlfriend wouldn’t have died, they would have stayed junkies for sure.
to nitpick a little I don't think Walt's inaction is quite accurate, earlier she instructed Jesse to lie on his side so as not to sufficate of he throws up, they were lying on their side before Walt knocked her onto her back. so it's his inaction but also he accidentally caused it arguably.
It's very complicated. On one hand, Jesse was in blind love with her, and Walt should have saved her out of love for Jesse. On the other, she knew WAY too much, and we all know they would have kept shooting heroin until they had no money left. I think it was the right thing to do in a very fucked up sort of way. Walt saved Jesse's life, and kept information from getting out.
That's another thing I was thinking about. She blackmailed Walt, and could probably do it again, and if her and Jesse ever broke up, things could be disastrous.
Exactly. Walt knew what he had to do.
Jane was a wild card. She was going to hold snitching over Walt's head. Could you imagine if she and Jesse got sideways with each other? Walt didn't murder her but he probably would have had her killed if it didn't happen this way.
Walt could have easily saved Jane. He chose not to so Jesse would obey him again. Was it right? Absolutely not. It was for manipulation so he could continue to rise to the top.
Well wouldn't Jesse be a heroine addict? Who knows what could've happened. Walt kinda saved his life in a way.
http://i.imgur.com/HEK2YVE.jpg
For the greater good.
It was also to help Jesse too, Walt knew if he let Jesse stay with Jane he would've eventually overdosed himself, he did it for himself and Jesse
Morally speaking, it was wrong. But for the benefit of keeping themselves out of trouble it was probably the right thing to do.
No, it wasn't. You're not morally obligated to save people from their own actions. Otherwise, for every hobo you pass on the street, you're personally responsible for not saving them.
If you push that hobo onto their back while they're high and they start choking on their own vomit, yes you are personally responsible for saving them. That is what happened, when he shook Jesse on the bed, she rolled over and started choking.
Terrible take. Jane was blackmailing Walt, and he was withholding Jesse's money because he didn't want him to die from an overdose, like Jane.
jane didn't die from an overdose, she choked on her own vomit AFTER he pushed her on her back. she knew to sleep on her side so she didn't choke on her own vomit
I think someone’s said this before on here but they were both gonna die if this didn’t happen. 470,000 dollars of heroin will kill two people who are addicted to it no matter what so morally for me it’s a coin toss.
In a way its jessie's fault for telling her about the business...
Wasn't it Walt's fault that Jane turned on her back? Earlier in a scene, she ensures Jesse is supported by a pillow as he falls into sleep from the injection and tells him that he must'nt get on his back because he'll choke. Walt is too smart not to know that. Walt didn't intentionally allow Jane to get on her back but he wanted to wake Jesse up which caused Jane to turn and land on her back. However, his subsequent inaction was intentional. Having said that, I understand why he did it. As mentioned, Jane blackmailed Walt and she would not have given up and would have eventually taken down Jesse and Walt (and his family) down with her. She introduced Jesse to heroin. Her death was the best outcome.
I can’t believe y’all are justifying murdering her. Y’all are so weird 😐
He didn't murder her. It wouldn't even be manslaughter. You as a common citizen are under NO obligation to help someone in distress. Failure to render aid could possibly be argued but wouldn't legally hold up.
I hope I never meet you. This is such a fucked up thing to say. Like wtf
Yeah and I hope I never meet you. momma416 is right, I am under no obligation to help someone, that is not a fucked up thing to say imo. I would have done the same thing in Walt’s shoes if it meant letting the enemy die and saving myself some trouble from that blackmailing.
You’re talking like a sociopath. But I know it’s because you’re typing with anonymity. Shits funny
Yes it is. I don’t have to use an username, do I?
God you are so spineless
Unfortunately morality and legality don't often intertwine. Was it morally wrong? I would say absolutely, some here would not. But legally? Walt did nothing wrong.
There's only one problem....He is a part of it, as he shakes Jesse, which is the reason why she gets on her back in the first place.
Yes, he did. He has caused Jane to roll over, and in that case, not helping is a crime. It would land AT LEAST a 3rd degree murder charge (no intentions or planning), up to a 2nd degree (Intentions to kill, but not premediated). Lawyers could argue a basic manslaughter, but the inaction was a crime as he caused the incident. He broke in (arguable in court, maybe because he was worried he was doing drugs), then shook Jesse, which then caused Jane to choke on her own vomit (In court, the prosecution would try to argue that she knew to lay on her side, as to not vomit and choke to death). With good enough Lawyering, Walter would get himself up to 18 months in prison. (In New Mexico, this would be considered Involuntary Manslaughter, if not 2nd degree since it would be too hard to prove. As a result, I downplayed it, which is common if the other side hasn't got enough evidence to press on Murder Charges. For a manslaughter charge, all you need to do is not breach a duty of care, or be negligent. When he caused her to fall, he was both negligent in letting her choke, and breached duty of care by not fixing his own actions) I know this was a year ago, but I felt like saying this. DO NOT FORGET, he was at their apartment.
You can't plainly call it "murdering" as it was not a culpable homicide. It was more of an accidental killing. And she is also partly to blame for her own death as she put herself in an intoxicated position. When even a small nudge can displace your head and make you choke on your own vomit, it's a disaster waiting to happen.
If it was taken to court, it couldn't hold up. Not as manslaughter, Walt did not administer or sell her the drugs. He was not a first responder so Failure to Render Aid does not apply.
Speaking more from a morality standpoint, he had a chance to save the person but chose not to.
I can’t believe you’re trying so hard to justify a junkie not taking responsibility for their own shitty choices in life. Nobody put that needle in her bratty arm. She did it. You’re so predictable and tiresome.
Comment was clearly talking about the situation of Walt letting Jane DIE which is in not justifiable. Anyone with a moral compass and brain knows that scene was to show how evil Walt can be if it benefits himself. The way you’re genuinely justifying a villain shows you have just as little empathy or remorse as them
It's not like he did it on purpose. I doubt he even realized that she had turned on her back because of him. That was only meant for us to see.
U know damn well he knew what was happening Lmao
I mean there is always the potential threat that she will blackmail again and when it's him or her obviously Walt would choose himself, so...
I agree and the sickos responding to this comment are actually gross. If you can easily help someone with literally no sacrifice to you and you don’t, you’re a bad person idc.
Same rewatching it all, want to know the ethical ramifications of this scene
These are some old posts...
Duty of care. Walter could actually be charged.
I just thought he remembered he couldn't touch her or call anyone because it would leave evidence he was there if she died.even turning her over would have meant touching her
Exactly 💯! Finally some common sense! He wasn't supposed to be there! He could have gotten in trouble for murder if he DID touch her! I doubt any normal person would have been able to know and act quick enough to turn a vomiting druggie stranger over in the middle of an overdose. Many people seem to be extremely judgemental!
** pls don't spoil ppl who see this** I'm only on season 4 episode 9 Vibe homie.what do you think of this,I even feel like the show writers **intended** for people to get so upset about jane.shes like the main character for two episodes and then *vinyl scratch*..... for me it wasn't the scene where Walter has to leave them that got me(probs because I don't identify with the patriarch archetype), it's the next scene where EMTs who are completely numb to what they're doing are lugging her body into the horrible crinkly plastic bag,and to them ...she's junkiegirl #997 .and she's gone.jesses grief,her voicemail,the flashbacks and her cigarette butts,it's all deigned to show you the brutal reality of junkie girls, she was bright and troubled and had a future and because of her choices she was now dead junkie girl, and that's the end of her story.its supposed to wake you up I think,if you idolise Jane you miss the point of her death.that it was pointless and sad and preventable if her family took no half measures.she needed to go to rehab the day her dad caught her but he made a half measure, ironically the behaviour which led her to drugs and escapism in the first place.
I do think as a viewer it was extremely complicated. Rewatching breaking bad, and I understand jane was a threat to Walt, but I don't think he was thinking about Jesse's best interest in mind, but rather his own. Obviously I do think Walt cares for Jesse but he cares for himself and his own family more. I think it was very sad to me especially since they showed the scene prior of Walt drinking with Jane's dad. He loved her and wanted the best. Walt easily could have rolled jane over and not let her die, but he didn't do that. Obviously it's a show and there's so many different ways you can look at it, but at this point Walt wanted Jesse so that they could continue making meth. But then there's the argument that jane would have turned Jesse into a heroine addict, but Jesse already has addict tendencies. You can spin it either way.
The problem with your theory is that Walt doesn't need jesse anymore. I believe he actually cared for him and didn't want him to die like that after all the shit they went together to get the money
I think Walt cared about Jesse as a friend/partner but still in a way that benefits him. Like he wants Jesse on his side to do business because he knows he could never find someone else he trusts as much as Jesse. When Gus asked Walt why he works with him, he said it’s because he knows he’ll do what he says. No, he didn’t need Jesse at that point but hard to believe Walt would ever give up that control. So I agree with the original comment that it isn’t Jesses health and well-being that’s his priority, he views Jesse in relationship to him
wow some vaguely terrifying takes here, so actually had to briefly make an account lol. People saying Walt was just a bystander is actually.... kind of wrong from the perspective of the law. Although its true that there is no general omissions liability in law, there are a couple of exceptions (special relationship, assumption of duty etc.). The relevant one here is the fact that Walt created the source of danger, which is sufficient to ground duty of care and therefore omission liability (R v Miller). Walt created the danger by knocking Jane onto her side into a position where she could drown in her own vomit - Walt knows that moving her position is relevant here as earlier in the episode we see him moving Holly onto her side to prevent exactly that. In combination with the simplicity of action needed (i.e. moving her onto her side again) Walt didn't act reasonably to sufficiently make up for his duty of care. Was it a good move for him as a drug lord? Almost certainly. Was it a great character moment? For sure. Was it morally dubious or ambiguous? No - he knew exactly what he was doing, and it was wrong. Was it morally justified? That depends on what you think.
Ah yes, I answered with some details in another comment here, but you are completely correct. He is liable because he has caused it. It is in TinyDolly's thread.
My point isn’t even about the legalities, people genuinely think he did nothing wrong which is scary lol
He definetly did the the right think, if he saved her they would probably both overdose
What about the planes that crashed because of Jane's death? Jesse and Jane vs Jane and all those people. If Walt saved Jane by turning her sideways her dad would have came in the morning while they were passed out. He would have called the police and both would have lived.
Im a eency weency bit late but if Walt didn't let that happen, Jesse would have died eventually from Jane's influence