Difference between revisions of "Manslaughter" - New World Encyclopedia
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
[[Category:Law]] | [[Category:Law]] | ||
| − | Manslaughter is a variation of [[homicide]] that normally carries a lesser sentence. Most legal systems differentiate between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. | + | Manslaughter is a [[crime|criminal]] variation of [[homicide]] that normally carries a lesser sentence than [[murder]]. Most legal systems differentiate between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. |
==Definition== | ==Definition== | ||
| − | The law generally differentiates between levels of criminal culpability based on the mens rea, or state of mind. | + | The law generally differentiates between levels of criminal culpability based on the presence or absence of ''[[mens rea]]'' (guilty mind), or the state of mind of the perpetrator. This is particularly true within the law of [[homicide]], where [[murder]] requires either the [[intent]] to kill, or a state of mind called [[malice (legal term)|malice]] (the intention to do injury to another), or [[malice aforethought]], which may involve an unintentional killing but with a "willful disregard" for life. The less serious offense of manslaughter, on the other hand, is the taking of human life but in a manner considered by law as less culpable than murder. |
| − | ''' | + | ''Black's Law Dictionary'' defines manslaughter as "the unjustifiable, inexcusable and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation or malice ... the unlawful killing of a human without deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due causation and circumspection." In this context, "involuntary" is defined as "that which is performed under duress, force, or coercion" as opposed to "accidental" killing which is "an act which is lawful and lawfully done under a reasonable belief that no harm is possible." |
| + | |||
| + | Thus, murder is a homicide committed intentionally or as a result of the commission of another serious offense (felony murder) and so contains the element of malice whereas manslaughter includes killings that are the result of recklessness or a violent emotional outburst, as when the killer is provoked by the victim, and are thus conducted without malice. | ||
==Voluntary manslaughter== | ==Voluntary manslaughter== | ||
| − | '''Voluntary Manslaughter''' is the intentional killing of a human being in which the offender had no prior intent to kill and acted during "the heat of passion," under circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed. | + | '''Voluntary Manslaughter''' is the intentional killing of a human being in which the offender had no prior intent to kill and acted during "the heat of passion," under circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed. In the [[Uniform Crime Reports]] prepared by the [[Federal Bureau of Investigation]] it is referred to as "nonnegligent manslaughter."<ref>[http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/index.html Violent Crime] Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved June 13, 2007.</ref> |
There have been two types of voluntary manslaughter recognized in law, although they are so closely related and in many cases indistinguishable that many jurisdictions do not differentiate between them. | There have been two types of voluntary manslaughter recognized in law, although they are so closely related and in many cases indistinguishable that many jurisdictions do not differentiate between them. | ||
| Line 19: | Line 21: | ||
=== Provocation === | === Provocation === | ||
| − | Provocation consists of the reasons for which one person kills another. | + | Provocation consists of the reasons for which one person kills another. "Adequate" or "reasonable" provocation is what makes the difference between voluntary manslaughter and murder. According to the book ''Criminal Law Today'', “provocation is said to be adequate if it would cause a reasonable person to lose self-control.”<ref>''Criminal Law Today.'' Schmalleger, 2006. p. 302</ref>. |
=== Imperfect Self-Defense === | === Imperfect Self-Defense === | ||
| − | In some jurisdictions malice can also be negated by imperfect [[self-defense]]. | + | In some jurisdictions malice can also be negated by imperfect [[self-defense]]. Self-defense is considered imperfect when the killer acted from his belief in the necessity for self-defense, but that belief was not reasonable under the circumstances. If the belief in self-defense were reasonable, then the killing would be considered justified and not unlawful. Where the belief is unreasonable the homicide is considered to be voluntary manslaughter. |
=== Intent to Kill === | === Intent to Kill === | ||
| − | Intent to kill is normally present during a voluntary manslaughter, but is not required. | + | Intent to kill is normally present during a voluntary manslaughter, but is not required. Since most heat of passion and imperfect self-defense killings involve intent to kill, typically voluntary manslaughters involve intentional killings. However, there are occasions when intent to kill is not present, although malice is. For example, a person responds to oral provocation by engaging in physical altercation. The provocation is sufficient so that his response is justified. He intends only to beat up those who have teased him, but someone unfortunately dies. The crime is voluntary manslaughter despite the absence of intent to kill. |
==Involuntary manslaughter== | ==Involuntary manslaughter== | ||
| − | + | Involuntary manslaughter, sometimes called [[criminally negligent]] homicide in the [[United States]] or [[culpable homicide]] in [[Scotland]],<ref>*[http://slcc.strath.ac.uk/scotslawcourse/crim/homi/culp1.htm Strathclyde University Scots law course] Retrieved July 7, 2007.</ref> occurs where there is no intention to kill or cause serious injury but death is due to [[recklessness (criminal)|recklessness]] or [[criminal negligence]]. | |
===Criminal negligence=== | ===Criminal negligence=== | ||
| − | + | Negligence consists of conduct by an individual which is not reasonable — that is, the individual did not act with the care and caution of a reasonable person in similar circumstances. This "reasonable person" is fictitious, of course, but reflects the standard of conduct which society wishes to impose. Violation of this standard may lead to civil liability for the consequences of the negligent behavior. | |
Negligence rises to the level of ''criminal negligence'' where the conduct reaches a higher degree of carelessness or inattention, perhaps to the point of indifference. | Negligence rises to the level of ''criminal negligence'' where the conduct reaches a higher degree of carelessness or inattention, perhaps to the point of indifference. | ||
===Recklessness=== | ===Recklessness=== | ||
| − | [[Recklessness (criminal)|Recklessness]] or [[willful blindness]] is defined as a wanton disregard for the known dangers of a particular situation. An example of this would be throwing a brick off a bridge onto vehicular traffic below. | + | [[Recklessness (criminal)|Recklessness]] or [[willful blindness]] is defined as a wanton disregard for the known dangers of a particular situation. An example of this would be throwing a brick off a bridge onto vehicular traffic below. There exists no intent to kill, consequently a resulting death may not be considered murder. However, the conduct is probably reckless, sometimes used interchangeably with criminally negligent, which may subject him to prosecution for involuntary manslaughter: the individual was aware of the risk of danger to others and willfully disregarded it. |
| − | In many jurisdictions | + | In many jurisdictions, if the unintentional conduct amounts to such gross negligence as to amount to a willful or depraved indifference to human life, the ''[[mens rea]]'' may be considered to constitute malice. In such a case, the offense may be murder, often characterized as second degree murder. |
| − | In some jurisdictions | + | In some jurisdictions recklessness is sufficient ''mens rea'' to justify a conviction for murder. |
===Vehicular or Intoxication manslaughter=== | ===Vehicular or Intoxication manslaughter=== | ||
| − | + | Vehicular manslaughter is a kind of misdemeanor manslaughter, which holds persons liable for any death that occurs because of criminal negligence or a violation of traffic safety laws. A common use of the vehicular manslaughter laws involves prosecution for a death caused by [[driving under the influence]] (or driving with .08% [[blood alcohol content]]), although an independent infraction or negligence is usually also required. | |
| − | In some US states, | + | In some US states, Intoxication Manslaughter is a distinctly defined offense. A person commits intoxication manslaughter if he or she operates a motor vehicle in a public place, operates an aircraft, a watercraft, or an amusement ride, or assembles a mobile amusement ride; and is [[intoxicated]] and by reason of that intoxication causes the death of another by accident or mistake.<ref>Tex. Penal Code § 49.08.</ref> |
| − | Intoxication manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter and other similar offenses require a lesser [[mens rea]] than other manslaughter offenses. Furthermore, the fact that the defendant is entitled to use the alcohol, controlled substance, drug, dangerous drug, or other substance is not a defense. <ref>TEX. PEN. CODE ANN. § 49.10; ''see also Nelson v. State'', 149 S.W.3d 206, 211 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2004, no pet.).</ref> For example, in Texas, to prove | + | Intoxication manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter and other similar offenses require a lesser ''[[mens rea]]'' than other manslaughter offenses. Furthermore, the fact that the defendant is entitled to use the alcohol, controlled substance, drug, dangerous drug, or other substance is not a defense. <ref>TEX. PEN. CODE ANN. § 49.10; ''see also Nelson v. State'', 149 S.W.3d 206, 211 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2004, no pet.).</ref> For example, in Texas, to prove intoxication manslaughter it is not necessary to prove the person was negligent in causing the death of another, only that they were intoxicated and operated a motor vehicle and someone died. |
===Misdemeanor manslaughter=== | ===Misdemeanor manslaughter=== | ||
In the United States, this is a lesser version of [[felony murder]] and covers a person who causes the death of another while committing a [[misdemeanor]] — that is, a violation of law that does not rise to the level of a felony. This may automatically lead to a [[conviction (law)|conviction]] for the homicide if the misdemeanor involved a law designed to protect human life. Many safety laws are [[infractions]], meaning that a person can be convicted regardless of ''mens rea''. | In the United States, this is a lesser version of [[felony murder]] and covers a person who causes the death of another while committing a [[misdemeanor]] — that is, a violation of law that does not rise to the level of a felony. This may automatically lead to a [[conviction (law)|conviction]] for the homicide if the misdemeanor involved a law designed to protect human life. Many safety laws are [[infractions]], meaning that a person can be convicted regardless of ''mens rea''. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||
| Line 62: | Line 60: | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
| + | *Collins, Karen-Michelle. 2002. [http://www.iejs.com/Law/Criminal_Law/Negligent_Homicide-Manslaughter.htm Negligent Homicide / Manslaughter (Involuntary)] ''International Journal of Justice Studies'' Retrieved July 2, 2007. | ||
*Duff, R. A. [http://wings.buffalo.edu/law/bclc/bclrarticles/6/1/duff.pdf "Virtue, Vice, and Criminal Liability: Do We Want an Aristotelian Criminal Law?"] Vol. 6. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 147 Retrieved July 5, 2007. | *Duff, R. A. [http://wings.buffalo.edu/law/bclc/bclrarticles/6/1/duff.pdf "Virtue, Vice, and Criminal Liability: Do We Want an Aristotelian Criminal Law?"] Vol. 6. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 147 Retrieved July 5, 2007. | ||
*Duff, R. A. (1990). ''Intention, Agency and Criminal Liability: Philosophy of Action and the Criminal Law (Philosophical Introductions)''. London: Blackwell. ISBN 0631153128 | *Duff, R. A. (1990). ''Intention, Agency and Criminal Liability: Philosophy of Action and the Criminal Law (Philosophical Introductions)''. London: Blackwell. ISBN 0631153128 | ||
*Gardner, Simon. (1995). "Manslaughter by Gross Negligence" 111 ''Law Quarterly Review'' 22 | *Gardner, Simon. (1995). "Manslaughter by Gross Negligence" 111 ''Law Quarterly Review'' 22 | ||
| + | *Garner, Bryan A. (Ed.) 2004. ''Black's Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition''. Thomson West. ISBN 0314151990 | ||
*[http://slcc.strath.ac.uk/scotslawcourse/crim/homi/culp1.htm Culpable Homicide] Strathclyde University Scots law course. Retrieved July 5, 2007. | *[http://slcc.strath.ac.uk/scotslawcourse/crim/homi/culp1.htm Culpable Homicide] Strathclyde University Scots law course. Retrieved July 5, 2007. | ||
== External links == | == External links == | ||
| − | *http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m012.htm | + | *[http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m012.htm Manslaughter, Voluntary] Retrieved July 7, 2007. |
| − | + | *[http://print.criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/a-z/manslaughter_voluntary.html Manslaughter: Voluntary] Retrieved July 7, 2007. | |
| − | *http://print.criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/a-z/manslaughter_voluntary.html | + | *''Criminal Code of Canada'' The Canadian Legal Information Institute [http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec222.html CanLII]. Retrieved July 7, 2007. |
| − | *'' | ||
{{Credits|Manslaughter|105237212|Manslaughter_in_English_law|125594497|Voluntary_manslaughter|132035716|Culpable_homicide|141441600|}} | {{Credits|Manslaughter|105237212|Manslaughter_in_English_law|125594497|Voluntary_manslaughter|132035716|Culpable_homicide|141441600|}} | ||
Revision as of 22:29, 7 July 2007
Manslaughter is a criminal variation of homicide that normally carries a lesser sentence than murder. Most legal systems differentiate between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter.
Definition
The law generally differentiates between levels of criminal culpability based on the presence or absence of mens rea (guilty mind), or the state of mind of the perpetrator. This is particularly true within the law of homicide, where murder requires either the intent to kill, or a state of mind called malice (the intention to do injury to another), or malice aforethought, which may involve an unintentional killing but with a "willful disregard" for life. The less serious offense of manslaughter, on the other hand, is the taking of human life but in a manner considered by law as less culpable than murder.
Black's Law Dictionary defines manslaughter as "the unjustifiable, inexcusable and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation or malice ... the unlawful killing of a human without deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due causation and circumspection." In this context, "involuntary" is defined as "that which is performed under duress, force, or coercion" as opposed to "accidental" killing which is "an act which is lawful and lawfully done under a reasonable belief that no harm is possible."
Thus, murder is a homicide committed intentionally or as a result of the commission of another serious offense (felony murder) and so contains the element of malice whereas manslaughter includes killings that are the result of recklessness or a violent emotional outburst, as when the killer is provoked by the victim, and are thus conducted without malice.
Voluntary manslaughter
Voluntary Manslaughter is the intentional killing of a human being in which the offender had no prior intent to kill and acted during "the heat of passion," under circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed. In the Uniform Crime Reports prepared by the Federal Bureau of Investigation it is referred to as "nonnegligent manslaughter."[1]
There have been two types of voluntary manslaughter recognized in law, although they are so closely related and in many cases indistinguishable that many jurisdictions do not differentiate between them.
Heat of Passion
In this situation, the actions of another cause the defendant to act in the heat of the moment and without reflection. Some examples include a defendant provoked into a loss of control by unexpectedly finding a spouse in the arms of a lover or witnessing an attack against his or her child.
Provocation
Provocation consists of the reasons for which one person kills another. "Adequate" or "reasonable" provocation is what makes the difference between voluntary manslaughter and murder. According to the book Criminal Law Today, “provocation is said to be adequate if it would cause a reasonable person to lose self-control.”[2].
Imperfect Self-Defense
In some jurisdictions malice can also be negated by imperfect self-defense. Self-defense is considered imperfect when the killer acted from his belief in the necessity for self-defense, but that belief was not reasonable under the circumstances. If the belief in self-defense were reasonable, then the killing would be considered justified and not unlawful. Where the belief is unreasonable the homicide is considered to be voluntary manslaughter.
Intent to Kill
Intent to kill is normally present during a voluntary manslaughter, but is not required. Since most heat of passion and imperfect self-defense killings involve intent to kill, typically voluntary manslaughters involve intentional killings. However, there are occasions when intent to kill is not present, although malice is. For example, a person responds to oral provocation by engaging in physical altercation. The provocation is sufficient so that his response is justified. He intends only to beat up those who have teased him, but someone unfortunately dies. The crime is voluntary manslaughter despite the absence of intent to kill.
Involuntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter, sometimes called criminally negligent homicide in the United States or culpable homicide in Scotland,[3] occurs where there is no intention to kill or cause serious injury but death is due to recklessness or criminal negligence.
Criminal negligence
Negligence consists of conduct by an individual which is not reasonable — that is, the individual did not act with the care and caution of a reasonable person in similar circumstances. This "reasonable person" is fictitious, of course, but reflects the standard of conduct which society wishes to impose. Violation of this standard may lead to civil liability for the consequences of the negligent behavior.
Negligence rises to the level of criminal negligence where the conduct reaches a higher degree of carelessness or inattention, perhaps to the point of indifference.
Recklessness
Recklessness or willful blindness is defined as a wanton disregard for the known dangers of a particular situation. An example of this would be throwing a brick off a bridge onto vehicular traffic below. There exists no intent to kill, consequently a resulting death may not be considered murder. However, the conduct is probably reckless, sometimes used interchangeably with criminally negligent, which may subject him to prosecution for involuntary manslaughter: the individual was aware of the risk of danger to others and willfully disregarded it.
In many jurisdictions, if the unintentional conduct amounts to such gross negligence as to amount to a willful or depraved indifference to human life, the mens rea may be considered to constitute malice. In such a case, the offense may be murder, often characterized as second degree murder.
In some jurisdictions recklessness is sufficient mens rea to justify a conviction for murder.
Vehicular or Intoxication manslaughter
Vehicular manslaughter is a kind of misdemeanor manslaughter, which holds persons liable for any death that occurs because of criminal negligence or a violation of traffic safety laws. A common use of the vehicular manslaughter laws involves prosecution for a death caused by driving under the influence (or driving with .08% blood alcohol content), although an independent infraction or negligence is usually also required.
In some US states, Intoxication Manslaughter is a distinctly defined offense. A person commits intoxication manslaughter if he or she operates a motor vehicle in a public place, operates an aircraft, a watercraft, or an amusement ride, or assembles a mobile amusement ride; and is intoxicated and by reason of that intoxication causes the death of another by accident or mistake.[4]
Intoxication manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter and other similar offenses require a lesser mens rea than other manslaughter offenses. Furthermore, the fact that the defendant is entitled to use the alcohol, controlled substance, drug, dangerous drug, or other substance is not a defense. [5] For example, in Texas, to prove intoxication manslaughter it is not necessary to prove the person was negligent in causing the death of another, only that they were intoxicated and operated a motor vehicle and someone died.
Misdemeanor manslaughter
In the United States, this is a lesser version of felony murder and covers a person who causes the death of another while committing a misdemeanor — that is, a violation of law that does not rise to the level of a felony. This may automatically lead to a conviction for the homicide if the misdemeanor involved a law designed to protect human life. Many safety laws are infractions, meaning that a person can be convicted regardless of mens rea.
Notes
- ↑ Violent Crime Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved June 13, 2007.
- ↑ Criminal Law Today. Schmalleger, 2006. p. 302
- ↑ *Strathclyde University Scots law course Retrieved July 7, 2007.
- ↑ Tex. Penal Code § 49.08.
- ↑ TEX. PEN. CODE ANN. § 49.10; see also Nelson v. State, 149 S.W.3d 206, 211 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2004, no pet.).
ReferencesISBN links support NWE through referral fees
- Collins, Karen-Michelle. 2002. Negligent Homicide / Manslaughter (Involuntary) International Journal of Justice Studies Retrieved July 2, 2007.
- Duff, R. A. "Virtue, Vice, and Criminal Liability: Do We Want an Aristotelian Criminal Law?" Vol. 6. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 147 Retrieved July 5, 2007.
- Duff, R. A. (1990). Intention, Agency and Criminal Liability: Philosophy of Action and the Criminal Law (Philosophical Introductions). London: Blackwell. ISBN 0631153128
- Gardner, Simon. (1995). "Manslaughter by Gross Negligence" 111 Law Quarterly Review 22
- Garner, Bryan A. (Ed.) 2004. Black's Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition. Thomson West. ISBN 0314151990
- Culpable Homicide Strathclyde University Scots law course. Retrieved July 5, 2007.
External links
- Manslaughter, Voluntary Retrieved July 7, 2007.
- Manslaughter: Voluntary Retrieved July 7, 2007.
- Criminal Code of Canada The Canadian Legal Information Institute CanLII. Retrieved July 7, 2007.
Credits
New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:
- Manslaughter history
- Manslaughter_in_English_law history
- Voluntary_manslaughter history
- Culpable_homicide history
The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:
Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.
