My question is a hypothetical one. I was conducting some research into the differences between murder, homicide and manslaughter and I didn't understand the difference between homicide and manslaughter. Let's say there are two friends walking down a busy street, teasing each other. One of them playfully pushes the other who falls into the oncoming traffic. That person doesn't make it. Will the friend who pushed be charged with manslaughter or homicide, if he were to be charged at all?
-
Which country/jurisdiction?– GreendrakeCommented Apr 28, 2020 at 14:51
-
Let's say that it happened in Canada.– SaphireCommented Apr 28, 2020 at 14:52
-
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_(Canadian_law) seems like a good starting point. Ultimately it is up to a court to decide whether the definition applies to any particular set of facts.– Nate EldredgeCommented Apr 28, 2020 at 15:07
-
@NateEldredge but isn't the question actually asking what these definitions happen to be rather than whether they apply to this situation? The hypothetical created here sounds like it is there just for the purposes of an illustration how the definitions may apply rather than an advice on whether they would apply.– grovkinCommented Apr 28, 2020 at 15:21
-
1I think your question in the title is ill-phrased. In general English usage, and apparently in Canadian law, homicide is the broad category of causing the death of a human. A homicide may be culpable or non-culpable. Culpable homicide includes murder, manslaughter, and infanticide. If you've committed manslaughter you've committed a homicide. Are you actually asking for the difference between murder, 2nd degree murger, and manslaughter?– Charles E. GrantCommented Apr 28, 2020 at 17:59
|
Show 3 more comments
4 Answers
Under Canadian law, causing the death of human being is homicide. If the homicide is "culpable", it is an offense (crime). In the described scenario, it might be culpable homicide if the death was due to "criminal negligence". That would be the case if in doing a thing, the person "shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons".
We've now reached the end of what statutory law has to say about the question. Court cases take us a bit further in understanding criminal negligence. The wisdom of the courts is distilled to ts essence in jury instructions, which say
The Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused's conduct showed a marked departure from the conduct of a reasonable person in the circumstances; and that a reasonable person in the same circumstances would have foreseen that this conduct posed a risk of bodily harm.
R. v. Tutton is an example: the court finds that
The phrase "wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons" signifies more than gross negligence in the objective sense. It requires some degree of awareness or advertence to the threat to the lives or safety of others or alternatively a wilful blindness to that threat which is culpable in light of the gravity of the risk assumed.
Ultimately, though, the fact-finder must evaluate the behavior against a highly subjective standard as to "what a reasonable man would do". I cannot imagine a scenario where shoving a person realistically could lead to them falling into traffic and getting killed but there the shoving was ordinary horseplay. Pushing a person in the direction of oncoming traffic is abnormal behavior that shows shocking disregard for the probable harm caused to another. But perhaps there is some innocent scenario where this was really just a tragic outcome. So the answer is, it could be culpable homicide, or not, depending on the facts.
To be classed as murder (rather than manslaughter) the person has to intend to cause death (§229), which is missing from this scenario.
answered Apr 28, 2020 at 18:05
My question is a hypothetical one. I was conducting some research into the differences between murder, homicide and manslaughter and I didn't understand the difference between homicide and manslaughter.
Homicide means a death caused by another person. Murder and manslaughter are among the criminal offenses that can constitute homicide.
Not all homicides are crimes. For example, killing someone in self-defense is homicide, but is not a crime.
Homicide is a determination usually made by a coroner or medical examiner. Specific crimes that homicide might constitute are usually determined by a prosecutor, judge and jury.
Generally, the different homicide offenses differ by level of intent.
In the Model Penal Code, intentionally or knowingly causing a death is murder (fist degree and second degree respectively), recklessly causing a death is manslaughter, and there is also a negligent homicide offense which involves causing a death through criminal negligence which is equivalent to "gross negligence" in a civil case. Not all penal codes follow this definition, however.
The common law crime definitions were somewhat different. Voluntary manslaughter roughly corresponds to reckless conduct. Involuntary manslaughter roughly corresponds to criminally negligent conduct.
Let's say there are two friends walking down a busy street, teasing each other. One of them playfully pushes the other who falls into the oncoming traffic. That person doesn't make it. Will the friend who pushed be charged with manslaughter or homicide, if he were to be charged at all?
This is homicide, which is not a crime in and of itself.
It could be reckless manslaughter/voluntary manslaughter. It could be criminal negligence and hence negligent homicide/involuntary manslaughter. It could not rise to the legal of criminal conduct, but constitute civil negligence.
A judge and/or jury would determine this in a fact intensive/context sensitive way on a case by case basis. Different juries could reach different conclusions on exactly the same facts which would be upheld on appeal.
The age of the friends would also matter and if young enough, the perpetrator might be below the age of criminal and/or civil responsibility.
The murder is the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another. Thus, there is essentially the malice aforethought whereas manslaughter is unlawful killing of another essentially without malice aforethought.
Murder differs from voluntary manslaughter in that the latter’s perpetrator had no prior intent to kill the victim, and probably acted in the heat of passion. Sides that its just voluntary or some other type of manslaghter, if its an accident.
-
Premeditation is for first degree murder. One can be guilty of murder without having premeditation. Indeed, that is the usual case. Commented Mar 7 at 19:14
What is a voluntary manslaughter can be seen in CSI ep. 251 (season 11). There was a serial killer Nate Haskell, that had been brought to court by CSI team member Raymond Langston. But Haskell made his escape from the courthouse and became obsessed on Raymond Langston. So Haskell murdered Langston's ex-wife husband and kidnapped her. Raymond made it to find house, where Haskell kept his ex-wife and found her there alive. Also Ramond Lanston restraints Haskell with handcuffs. But when he saw, what Haskell had done to his ex-wife (Haskell had brutally raped her), Raymond Langston removed handcuffs from Haskell and threw him from stairs. Raymond Langston wasn't going to kill Haskell before he saw Haskell's crime against his ex, that produced his righteous anger. But anyway it's a voluntary manslaughter, because Langston could call his team and Haskell would be sent to jail and convicted also for all his new crimes. But in the series Raymond Langston wasn't convicted, investigation wasn't shown, but the only witness was Langston ex, who was also a victim of Haskell's crime. And in real life such cases are very complex, because often a victim of a voluntary manslaughter won't get jurors sympathy, but defendant will.
-
2