Here is example I am interested in: Bob has a cup that he knows is filled with poison and apple juice. He places the cup on a table. Another person Andrew asks Bob if he can drink that apple juice (Andrew doesn't know about the poison). Bob says he can. But Andrew decides not to drink it.
So the question is: Is what Bob did illegal? Considering that Andrew didn't drink. Can Bob be held liable if Andrew were to realise the truth?
StGB §211 dictates, that Mord (~murder) can be triggered by an act that is (among others) insidious or dangerous to the public. Allowing an unwitting person to drink poison is insidious, putting poison out for consumption by anyone is dangerous to the public at large. Also, the BGH repeatedly affirmed, that depraved indifference to who might die triggers Mord: you do not need to want to kill a specific person, or even want to kill anyone, it suffices that you willingly accept that you could kill someone with a dangerous act and take no precautions. For example, driving a street race shows this depraved indifference, and as a result, running someone over during one is (attempted) murder.
As Andrew did not drink, we are at worst at the attempt under StGB § 22. The attempt is to be punished exactly the same as the successful deed.
As such, the prosecution in Germany can charge attempted murder for depraved indifference:
But since Andrew did not drink, we are at "Versuchter Mord". If proven, Bob is to be sentenced to life in prison because Mord only allows a sentence of life. Only in the case of an attempt, the court might show leniency and reduce the sentence somewhat, though it is unlikely with depraved indifference.
