I had that game as a child, thought of it just after I posted

writing down morobar cheesecake...

cheers :)

I tend to fall for a well constructed cheesecake trap. A silently dropping cage and I'm done.

It's definitely wrong to dig them up from a cemetary.
Diminished capacity can also be an issue since it might be hard to qualify the consent rule. Old and drunk can be a problem for the same reason. Or drunken in general, or asleep at the time.

Things like that aside you might be okay.

The extreme unlikelihood of any surviving thylacine in hiding is the notable behaviour common among Australian native animals of being oblivious to large predators (such as feral dogs), since other than thylacine all of them have been introduced within the last 200 years. The reason (other than a lack of medical resistance to foreign bugs and diseases), why feral dogs and cats have had such devastating effect upon native wildlife is because an Australian possum just hasn't learned to run for dear life at the slightest movement in the brush like an American possum is because they still don't expect a fox, bear, cat or wild/feral dog. They expect a koala.

Put simply the inherent characteristic of native Australian wildlife is being extremely vulnerable to imported predators, to an irrational degree by human way of thinking. Thylacine were just as vulnerable as others, it's basically a big carnivorous possum and so much more like a possum than a dog for things like fighting qualities. Hence when colonists first arrived in Tasmania there was a reasonable population of them, within about thirty years there were virtually none, probably due to pet dogs of colonists more than human hunting.

There are packs of wild dogs all over rural Oz and ferals all over urban forests. They kill livestock, thylacine wouldn't stand a chance and there's nowhere for them to hide. A lone big cat escaped from an open range zoo wouldn't last two weeks when the dog packs come for them and they're a thousand times more combat worthy than a thylacine.
Definitely extinct.

There's also the points that archaeological finds rarely involve complete skeletons and ancient cultures commonly featured more diminutive frames of shorter lifespans and greater effects of ageing, disease, hard living and intrinsic variation such as genetic disorders.

Palaeoanthropology is often encumbered by the fact the further back you go, the greater amount of variation you tend to find among groupings, so much so that ancient hominid finds have confused genetic disorders and other intrinsic variations within a regional grouping with new species discoveries.

It is therefore inescapable that a bulk of archaeology and palaeoanthropology functions upon assumptions and best guess scenarios. It still adheres to scientific method where the hypothesis remains falsifiable, so as new facts are discovered, new history books are published which readily contradict previous publications. All science functions correctly this way, but it is more dramatically apparent in the study of history.

The trick is you're not looking at the black hole itself, all you can see from a distance is the point at which its gravity is so great that escape velocity is greater than the speed of light, called the event horizon. So you can only see an optical illusion generated at the point where this event horizon begins to occur, which is a distance from the black hole centre, necessarily the same distance from that point in any approach direction. So, spherical.

I've been preparing for the nuclear winter by hotting up my car like Mad Max the Road Warrior.

After the warheads start raining the gasoline war will begin on the road.

I shall become a reluctant, enigmatic hero haunted by memories of the past and seeking a sexy sidekick in a metallic bikini and a shaved mohawk with a penchant for bladed weapons. She both thrills and terrifies me and becomes the only thing I'm actually afraid of. Better the devil you know.

Better the devil you know.

For good or ill British Commonwealth has a specific law related to inaction called Duty of Care, although it can only be realistically enforced under extreme circumstances. It states that anyone whom witnesses an act or environment which constitutes a foreseeable danger to any persons is compelled to act or be found in breach of an indictable offence (our version of felony, summary offence is a misdemeanor).

It is used, for example to compel rendering aid if you witness a motor accident with serious injuries or similar event, although rendering aid could be as simple as contacting authorities as opposed to acting as a first aider when you don't know what you're doing.

It is a very generalized law which can only be loosely interpreted by a magistrate, it is very rarely enforced unless a very clear case of breach in duty of care is involved, such as taunting a drowning person at a public pool, whom then drowns and dies. You'll probably get charged with an indictable offence for taunting them instead of helping them but since you didn't actually contribute to their circumstance it is breach in duty of care that you'll be charged with and possibly receive similar sentencing as a low level murder charge like 3rd degree or manslaughter.

It's really just situations like that in which authorities pull out this law. But it is so generalized that it can be brought out fairly universally for any situation that an indictable degree of callous inaction, resulting in serious injuries or deaths can be argued with a magistrate.

On the positive side, breach in duty of care trumps privacy contracts in business law, since they're not valid involving any criminal activity and if company practise or policy presents any foreseeable danger to any persons it is a criminal activity without needing evidence of anything other than foreseeable risk. Employees personal ethic would normally be compromised where they could not speak up versus endangerment to the public by the company unless a crime of actually harming someone had occured, thus forced by an employee privacy agreement not to speak up. But with breach in duty of care there doesn't need to be actual harm for you to legally break the privacy agreement and spill the beans on the company policies to the entire world, there only has to be a foreseeable risk as ruled by a magistrate to break the contract.

Mercedes 190E AMG 3.2