The doctor was found guilty of murder, because he had overwhelming control of the situation. No idea what "felony murder rule" is but if it's in the anglo-saxon tradition, I doubt it's applicable.
I can't remember what happened with the piano. IIRC, both cases happened in Germany and the piano one was long ago so cameras and mics were not a possibility then. Anyway the legal foundation in play there was if there's somehow a legitimate interest in the clause, not just a whim.
The felony murder rule is, if you commit a felony, and a person dies as a result of your crime, then you are guilty of murder. The classic example is the getaway driver in a bank robbery. If the bank robbers go in and shoot the security guard, a clerk or two, and a customer, and all you do as the getaway driver is drive the robbers away from the crime, you will still go to jail for murder even though you had nothing to do with pulling any triggers and may not have expected or wanted anyone to die. A less intuitive consequence of this is, if you are a bank robber, and the security guard shoots your fellow robber, and the other robber dies, then you are also guilty of murder because your felony (robbing the bank) led to the death of the other robber.
Yeah, I don't see that last thing working in my country.
"Criminal organization" is a crime in itself so it's a different tool to apply tougher penalties. But, apart from that, the complicity rules have more strict requirements.
I can't remember what happened with the piano. IIRC, both cases happened in Germany and the piano one was long ago so cameras and mics were not a possibility then. Anyway the legal foundation in play there was if there's somehow a legitimate interest in the clause, not just a whim.