Homicide is defined as the killing of one human being as a result of actions taken by another. Under British law, a range of distinct acts fall under the definition of homicide, and while the term “homicide” is often used synonymously with “murder,” homicide must be defined more broadly under the law. Fortunately one doesn't need an online doctorate to grasp the distinction between these terms.
Murder is just one type of homicide, and there are other forms of homicide that may not be regarded as criminal acts. For example, a homicide committed in self-defense might be considered justifiable and is not a crime. For murder to occur there must be an actus reus, a voluntary wrongful or unlawful act or omission that causes the death of another person.
Murder is just one type of homicide, and there are other forms of homicide that may not be regarded as criminal acts. For example, a homicide committed in self-defense might be considered justifiable and is not a crime. For murder to occur there must be an actus reus, a voluntary wrongful or unlawful act or omission that causes the death of another person.
The classic definition of murder by Sir Edward Coke remains the basis of statute law for criminal homicide in Britain:
Murder is when a man of sound memory, and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any country of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King's peace, with malice aforethought, either expressed by the party or implied by law, so as the party wounded, or hurt, etc. die of the wound or hurt, etc. within a year and a day after the same.
The primary distinction of “malice aforethought,” or criminal intent, distinguishes murder from the lesser form of criminal homicide, manslaughter. It is the intent of the killer that determines the degree of criminal culpability applied to a criminal homicide.
Manslaughter, while still actus reus and unlawful, lacks the distinction of forethought in intent, and typically is applied to unintentional homicides that result from a person's criminal negligence or reckless disregard. Manslaughter is further broken down into voluntary and involuntary categories: voluntary manslaughter includes the element of criminal intent (mens rea), but with mitigating circumstances; while involuntary manslaughter lacks completely the element of criminal intent.
Manslaughter, while still actus reus and unlawful, lacks the distinction of forethought in intent, and typically is applied to unintentional homicides that result from a person's criminal negligence or reckless disregard. Manslaughter is further broken down into voluntary and involuntary categories: voluntary manslaughter includes the element of criminal intent (mens rea), but with mitigating circumstances; while involuntary manslaughter lacks completely the element of criminal intent.
In English law the test for manslaughter is gross negligence, wherein an act or omission to act shows a reckless disregard for danger, life, and safety resulting in the death of another person. There are many distinct varieties of involuntary manslaughter ranging from assisting suicide to culpable negligence to medical malpractice.
In some cases a homicide may be considered justifiable depending on the circumstances, and therefore not prosecutable as a criminal offense. For example, if a person kills in the act of self-defense, or in the act of defending others from imminent harm or death, it is considered a justifiable homicide and is not a criminal offense, as the act of killing is done without evil or criminal intent. However, the circumstances must show the killer possessed a reasonable expectation that his failure to kill would result in harm to himself or others.
Similarly, there are a few other cases where homicide is considered justifiable and non-criminal. The use of deadly force by police officers in the course of their duties is one example, though the circumstances of the killing must fall within certain criteria, such as a shooting during the commission of a felony criminal act by a perpetrator where the officer believes there is imminent harm to others or himself. In addition, magistrates and public officers cannot be charged with criminal homicide if they give orders pursuant to public order that might result in deaths. Likewise, the killing of an enemy combatant during a time of war by a soldier acting under lawful orders is not considered a criminal homicide.
In some cases a homicide may be considered justifiable depending on the circumstances, and therefore not prosecutable as a criminal offense. For example, if a person kills in the act of self-defense, or in the act of defending others from imminent harm or death, it is considered a justifiable homicide and is not a criminal offense, as the act of killing is done without evil or criminal intent. However, the circumstances must show the killer possessed a reasonable expectation that his failure to kill would result in harm to himself or others.
Similarly, there are a few other cases where homicide is considered justifiable and non-criminal. The use of deadly force by police officers in the course of their duties is one example, though the circumstances of the killing must fall within certain criteria, such as a shooting during the commission of a felony criminal act by a perpetrator where the officer believes there is imminent harm to others or himself. In addition, magistrates and public officers cannot be charged with criminal homicide if they give orders pursuant to public order that might result in deaths. Likewise, the killing of an enemy combatant during a time of war by a soldier acting under lawful orders is not considered a criminal homicide.
Author: Elaine Hirsch. (USA)
