When a person dies in custody as the result of police action the medical examiner often rules the death a homicide based upon the “but for” conclusion: but for the police chasing him, he would not have died; but for the police trying to take him into custody, he would not have fought, if he had not fought, he would not have died. The coroner rules that the police were the proximal cause of death, but generally they are not held criminally liable. I think the same principle applies to the mRNA shots. Millions of people have taken these injections. Many, possibly the majority, because of coercion (coercion is a crime). The manufacturers probably knew before the products were released that they caused death (more than was reasonable), they definitely knew shortly after that they caused death, and they surely know now that they cause death. Based upon the “but for” principle they have committed homicide (one person killing another person) by recommending or requiring that people to be injected with an injurious substance (poison). Whether the homicide rises to the level of a criminal act, either manslaughter or murder, would be up to the interpretation of a law enforcement officer and a prosecutor. Murder requires malice, whether fleeting or premeditated. That is a high bar in this circumstance. Manslaughter simply requires negligence. Probable cause to charge someone simply asks the question: would a reasonable person believe there is evidence (even a scintilla) that a crime was committed, and a certain person committed it? I believe there is a mountain of evidence that the regulatory agencies, pharmaceutical companies, and unfortunately a lot of doctors and nurses knew that these injections were/are killing people. They were negligent in not reporting it, and worse, still recommended it. That is a crime. The Florida Grand Juries just might come to the same conclusion if the right evidence is presented.