I had the best photograph posed for today's post, but unfortunately the Humans interfered. I managed to scratch my throat while wearing my harness and had my white throat and both front paws covered in blood. I thought that would be a great way to introduce today's discussion of homicide, but the Humans freaked out and the next thing you know, I was in the bathtub. So, you're going to have to use your imagination to picture this adorable little fur-ball as a killer. (Hey, technically I am a predator, even if I prefer tomato soup to chicken).
I hear a lot of confusion regarding the different types of homicide, so today's post is a very brief overview of the basic definitions of first degree murder, second degree murder and manslaughter. Keep in mind that in each jurisdiction, these definitions are set by statute, so these are just the very basics that are common to each state.
Let's start at the top with first degree murder. If you were to think of the term “murder” this is probably what you'd picture. First degree murder consists of three elements: an unlawful killing, malice, and premeditation. Malice has nothing to do with being a “bad” person. In the legal sense, it means that the defendant “had a specific intent to kill or to cause grievous bodily injury, or to do an act that in the circumstances known to defendant a reasonable person in the same situation would have known that the doing of that act would have created a strong likelihood that death would happen.” (Quote taken from Human Female's old law school lecture notes). Bear with me, that will make more sense when we discuss manslaughter, below.
Premeditation does not necessarily mean making a plan. It simply means that the defendant thought before she acted. The time frame can be a matter of mere seconds. Imagine Pandora gets into a cab. For reasons unclear, the taxi cab driver takes a cat as a fare, which proves to be a fatal mistake because Pandora, attempting to rob the cab driver stabs him. In the seconds that follow the stabbing, however, Pandora slashes his throat. (I'd like to note here that Pandora is a very sweet cat in real life, and this is a purely fictional example surely out of character for the real life Pandora. Just in case the neighbors read this.) Pandora claims at her trial that she really only meant to wound the driver as part of the commission of the robbery. Her lawyer argues that the element of premeditation is missing because there wasn't enough time between the stabbing and the slashing for her to form the intent to kill. Not so. Despite the fact that it took place in the space of a millisecond, Pandora formed the intent to kill the driver, not just wound him, and that is when she slashed his throat. (Facts taken from State v. Ollens 733 P.2d 984 (Wash. 1987)).
In some states, by statute, first degree murder also includes any killing that is done as a result of poisoning, or with “extreme atrocity.” (See M.G.L.A. 265 §1). It also can include “felony murder,” which is a killing committed as part of committing another felony, (think of a bank robbery).
Let's move on to second degree murder. Please keep in mind that second degree murder doesn't necessarily mean that the killing was somewhat more justified in some way than first degree murder. It is a pure matter of definition. The homicide definitions provide a legal framework, not a moral one. There is a story behind each case (probably more than one story, really), and the law is not interested in human stories. I digress. Second degree murder requires that the defendant have known that her actions carried a strong likelihood of causing death. Imagine Pandora organizes a Russian Roulette game. Instead of following the accepted rules of the “game,” Pandora pulls the trigger three times against the Jack Russell's head. Given the chances, she reasonably should have known that by doing so, there was a 60% chance of killing Jack. (See Commonwealth v. Malone, 47 A.2d 445 (Penn 1946). 354 PA 180.) Why would she do such a thing? Who knows, and, in purely legal terms, it just doesn't matter. Motive is not an essential element of second degree murder.
Another term that falls under second degree murder is something called “depraved heart murder.” Again, we're talking depravity in the legal sense. No leather whips and chains necessary. This is “an act done willfully and deliberately as opposed to negligently which is so wanton or reckless as to indicate extreme indifference to human life generally.” (Human Female's lecture notes again.) The key here is something called “universal malice.” Instead of an intent to cause death or serious bodily harm to one specific individual, the defendant's intent is aimed at an unknown group. Imagine that Pandora is out joyriding while intoxicated with her friend in the car. Throughout the night, she stops at a number of bars to continue drinking. Her friend tells Pandora that her driving is scaring her. Pandora has a near miss and nearly gets into a car accident. At one point, a police officer tells her not to drive. Pandora, despite all of these warnings, continues to drive, causing a horrible accident and killing someone. (See Pears v. State, 672 P.2d 903 (Alaska App. 1983)). Pandora should have known that her actions were likely to cause a death, and continued to drive. That, is depraved-heart murder.
This brings us to manslaughter. Manslaughter is broken down again into voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter. Earlier I mentioned that malice would become clearer when we discussed manslaughter, and that is because manslaughter does not include the element of malice. Comparing first degree and manslaughter examples highlights the difference. You can think of voluntary manslaughter as a first degree murder that has been mitigated to such an extent by the circumstances that the defendant didn't have the requisite intent, or state of mind, to constitute legal malice. This circumstance is often termed the “heat of passion.” Courts have split hairs on what constitutes heat of passion for ages, so suffice it to say for now that it refers to some circumstance under which a reasonable person would be so upset as to act as the defendant did. Imagine Pandora walks in on her husband in bed with the Jack Russell and kills Jack. She had the intent to kill Jack, so it was clearly premeditated, but she was so upset as to not be able to form the state of mind in which she could be considered to have consciously acted with malice. Or, imagine that the Jack Russell attacks Pandora and she fights back in self defense, but counters his attack with unreasonable force, (i.e. she pulls a gun on him when he attacked her with bare paws).
Involuntary manslaughter differs from all of the above in that the death was unintended. The defendant was so negligent that she exhibited a “reckless disregard for human life.” (Human Female's lecture notes). In failing to perform a duty that the defendant had, or in preforming it in a grossly negligent fashion, she caused a death. Think of an ordinary drunk-driving case (as opposed to the example above, where Pandora was told multiple times that she ran the risk of killing someone). To my mind, these cases can be some of the saddest because the defendant may have acted with the best of intentions, and, in the moral sense, has already suffered the loss of the person who died. Imagine Pandora has a kitten who is sick. Pandora loves her kitten, but she is afraid that if she brings the kitten to the vet, the vet will report her to the MSPCA for animal abuse, (even though she didn't abuse the kitten). Her fear is so overwhelming, that she refuses to bring the kitten to the vet, caring for her instead as best she can, until the kitten dies. The law presumes that she should be punished, because she should have known that she could have saved her kitten, and failed to protect her. (See State v. Williams, 484 P.2d 1167 (Wash. App. 1971).
For a less heart-wrenching example, see Michael Jackson's physician, who owed a duty to care for his patient and, recklessly disregarded that duty.
So there you have it, the three basic forms of homicide, as brought to you in the furry version (instead of the horribly upsetting human form). As always, I'm happy to answer your questions. Oh, and I'm purrfectly fine, thank you for asking. The biggest trauma was the bath. Human Male bought me a new ball and I got lots of treats.
I hear a lot of confusion regarding the different types of homicide, so today's post is a very brief overview of the basic definitions of first degree murder, second degree murder and manslaughter. Keep in mind that in each jurisdiction, these definitions are set by statute, so these are just the very basics that are common to each state.
Let's start at the top with first degree murder. If you were to think of the term “murder” this is probably what you'd picture. First degree murder consists of three elements: an unlawful killing, malice, and premeditation. Malice has nothing to do with being a “bad” person. In the legal sense, it means that the defendant “had a specific intent to kill or to cause grievous bodily injury, or to do an act that in the circumstances known to defendant a reasonable person in the same situation would have known that the doing of that act would have created a strong likelihood that death would happen.” (Quote taken from Human Female's old law school lecture notes). Bear with me, that will make more sense when we discuss manslaughter, below.
Premeditation does not necessarily mean making a plan. It simply means that the defendant thought before she acted. The time frame can be a matter of mere seconds. Imagine Pandora gets into a cab. For reasons unclear, the taxi cab driver takes a cat as a fare, which proves to be a fatal mistake because Pandora, attempting to rob the cab driver stabs him. In the seconds that follow the stabbing, however, Pandora slashes his throat. (I'd like to note here that Pandora is a very sweet cat in real life, and this is a purely fictional example surely out of character for the real life Pandora. Just in case the neighbors read this.) Pandora claims at her trial that she really only meant to wound the driver as part of the commission of the robbery. Her lawyer argues that the element of premeditation is missing because there wasn't enough time between the stabbing and the slashing for her to form the intent to kill. Not so. Despite the fact that it took place in the space of a millisecond, Pandora formed the intent to kill the driver, not just wound him, and that is when she slashed his throat. (Facts taken from State v. Ollens 733 P.2d 984 (Wash. 1987)).
In some states, by statute, first degree murder also includes any killing that is done as a result of poisoning, or with “extreme atrocity.” (See M.G.L.A. 265 §1). It also can include “felony murder,” which is a killing committed as part of committing another felony, (think of a bank robbery).
Let's move on to second degree murder. Please keep in mind that second degree murder doesn't necessarily mean that the killing was somewhat more justified in some way than first degree murder. It is a pure matter of definition. The homicide definitions provide a legal framework, not a moral one. There is a story behind each case (probably more than one story, really), and the law is not interested in human stories. I digress. Second degree murder requires that the defendant have known that her actions carried a strong likelihood of causing death. Imagine Pandora organizes a Russian Roulette game. Instead of following the accepted rules of the “game,” Pandora pulls the trigger three times against the Jack Russell's head. Given the chances, she reasonably should have known that by doing so, there was a 60% chance of killing Jack. (See Commonwealth v. Malone, 47 A.2d 445 (Penn 1946). 354 PA 180.) Why would she do such a thing? Who knows, and, in purely legal terms, it just doesn't matter. Motive is not an essential element of second degree murder.
Another term that falls under second degree murder is something called “depraved heart murder.” Again, we're talking depravity in the legal sense. No leather whips and chains necessary. This is “an act done willfully and deliberately as opposed to negligently which is so wanton or reckless as to indicate extreme indifference to human life generally.” (Human Female's lecture notes again.) The key here is something called “universal malice.” Instead of an intent to cause death or serious bodily harm to one specific individual, the defendant's intent is aimed at an unknown group. Imagine that Pandora is out joyriding while intoxicated with her friend in the car. Throughout the night, she stops at a number of bars to continue drinking. Her friend tells Pandora that her driving is scaring her. Pandora has a near miss and nearly gets into a car accident. At one point, a police officer tells her not to drive. Pandora, despite all of these warnings, continues to drive, causing a horrible accident and killing someone. (See Pears v. State, 672 P.2d 903 (Alaska App. 1983)). Pandora should have known that her actions were likely to cause a death, and continued to drive. That, is depraved-heart murder.
This brings us to manslaughter. Manslaughter is broken down again into voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter. Earlier I mentioned that malice would become clearer when we discussed manslaughter, and that is because manslaughter does not include the element of malice. Comparing first degree and manslaughter examples highlights the difference. You can think of voluntary manslaughter as a first degree murder that has been mitigated to such an extent by the circumstances that the defendant didn't have the requisite intent, or state of mind, to constitute legal malice. This circumstance is often termed the “heat of passion.” Courts have split hairs on what constitutes heat of passion for ages, so suffice it to say for now that it refers to some circumstance under which a reasonable person would be so upset as to act as the defendant did. Imagine Pandora walks in on her husband in bed with the Jack Russell and kills Jack. She had the intent to kill Jack, so it was clearly premeditated, but she was so upset as to not be able to form the state of mind in which she could be considered to have consciously acted with malice. Or, imagine that the Jack Russell attacks Pandora and she fights back in self defense, but counters his attack with unreasonable force, (i.e. she pulls a gun on him when he attacked her with bare paws).
Involuntary manslaughter differs from all of the above in that the death was unintended. The defendant was so negligent that she exhibited a “reckless disregard for human life.” (Human Female's lecture notes). In failing to perform a duty that the defendant had, or in preforming it in a grossly negligent fashion, she caused a death. Think of an ordinary drunk-driving case (as opposed to the example above, where Pandora was told multiple times that she ran the risk of killing someone). To my mind, these cases can be some of the saddest because the defendant may have acted with the best of intentions, and, in the moral sense, has already suffered the loss of the person who died. Imagine Pandora has a kitten who is sick. Pandora loves her kitten, but she is afraid that if she brings the kitten to the vet, the vet will report her to the MSPCA for animal abuse, (even though she didn't abuse the kitten). Her fear is so overwhelming, that she refuses to bring the kitten to the vet, caring for her instead as best she can, until the kitten dies. The law presumes that she should be punished, because she should have known that she could have saved her kitten, and failed to protect her. (See State v. Williams, 484 P.2d 1167 (Wash. App. 1971).
For a less heart-wrenching example, see Michael Jackson's physician, who owed a duty to care for his patient and, recklessly disregarded that duty.
So there you have it, the three basic forms of homicide, as brought to you in the furry version (instead of the horribly upsetting human form). As always, I'm happy to answer your questions. Oh, and I'm purrfectly fine, thank you for asking. The biggest trauma was the bath. Human Male bought me a new ball and I got lots of treats.
No comments:
Post a Comment