What is the test for a jury to determine whether a defendant was responsible for the death of an inebriated man in a boating accident?

Here defendant, through his misconduct, placed the intoxicated victim in the middle of a dangerous river in the early morning hours clinging to an overturned boat. The fact that the panic stricken victim recklessly abandoned the boat and tried to swim ashore was not a wholly abnormal reaction to the perceived peril of drowning. Just as "[d]etached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife" (Brown v. United States (1921) 256 U.S. 335, 343, 41 S.Ct. 501, 502, 65 L.Ed. 961, 963, Holmes, J.), neither can caution be required of a drowning man. Having placed the inebriated victim in peril, defendant cannot obtain exoneration by claiming the victim should have reacted differently or more prudently. In sum, the evidence establishes that defendant's acts and omissions were the proximate cause of the victim's death.