[Avodah] Poisoning in Halacha

[Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah]

Tonight my chevrusa and I learned the sugya in Bava Kamma 47b of one who 
puts poison in front of his friend's animal. A brief synopsis and 
application of the sugya is at 
http://businesshalacha.com/en/newsletter/infected:


“A person put some poisoned food in front of his neighbor’s animal,” 
Rabbi Dayan said. “The animal ate the food and died. The owner sued the 
neighbor for killing his animal. What do you say about this case?”
“I would say he’s liable,” said Mr. Wolf. “He poisoned the animal.”
“I’m not so sure,” objected Mr. Mann. “The neighbor didn’t actually kill 
the animal. Although he put out the poison, the animal chose to eat the 
food.”
“Animals don’t exactly have choice,” reasoned Mr. Wolf. “If they see 
food, they eat! Anyway, even if the neighbor didn’t directly kill the 
animal, he certainly brought about the animal’s death.”
“But is that enough to hold him liable?” argued Mr. Mann. He turned to 
Rabbi Dayan.“The Gemara (B.K. 47b; 56a) teaches that placing poison 
before an animal is considered grama,” answered Rabbi Dayan. “The animal 
did not have to eat the poisoned food. Therefore, the neighbor is not 
legally liable in beis din, but he is responsible b’dinei Shamayim. This 
means that he has a strong moral liability to pay, albeit not 
enforceable in beis din (Shach 386:23; 32:2).”

It struck us that it follows that if one poisons another human being by, 
say, placing cyanide in his tea, which the victim then drinks and dies, 
the poisoner is exempt from capitol punishment. It would seem that such 
a manner of murder falls into the category of the Rambam's ruling in 
Hilchos Rotze'ach u'Shemiras Nefesh 3:10:


Different rules apply, however, in the following instances: A person 
binds a colleague and leaves him to starve to death; he binds him and 
leaves him in a place that will ultimately cause him to be subjected to 
cold or heat, and these influences indeed come and kill the victim; he 
covers him with a barrel; he uncovers the roof of the building where he 
was staying; or he causes a snake to bite him. Needless to say, a 
distinction is made if a colleague dispatches a dog or a snake at a 
colleague. In all the above instances, the person is not executed. He 
is, nevertheless, considered to be a murderer, and "the One who seeks 
vengeance for bloodshed" will seek vengeance for the blood he shed.

(translation from 
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1088919/jewish/Rotzeach-uShmirat-Nefesh-Chapter-Three.htm)

Perhaps this was a davar pashut to everyone else, but for me, tonight, 
it was a mind-boggling revelation!