Crime of passion
A crime of passion, in popular usage, refers to a violent crime homicide, in which the perpetrator commits the act against someone because of sudden strong impulse such as sudden rage rather than as a premeditated crime. The'crime of passion' defense challenges the mens rea element by suggesting that there was no malice aforethought, instead the crime was committed in the "heat of passion." In some jurisdictions, a successful'crime of passion' defense may result in a conviction for manslaughter or second degree murder instead of first degree murder, because a defendant cannot ordinarily be convicted of first degree murder unless the crime was premeditated. A classic example of a crime of passion involves a spouse who, upon finding his or her partner in bed with another, kills the romantic interloper. In the United States, claims of "crimes of passion" have been traditionally associated with the defenses of temporary insanity or provocation; this defense was first used by U. S. Congressman Daniel Sickles of New York in 1859 after he had killed his wife's lover, Philip Barton Key II.
It was used as a defense in murder cases during the 1950s. Such defenses were used as complete defenses for various violent crimes, but they became used as a partial defense to a charge of murder. In some countries, notably France, crime passionnel was a valid defense to murder charges. During the 19th century, some such cases resulted in a custodial sentence for the murderer of two years. After the Napoleonic code was updated in the 1970s, paternal authority over the members of the family was ended, thus reducing the occasions for which crime passionnel could be claimed; the Canadian Department of Justice, has described crimes of passion as "abrupt and unpremeditated acts of violence committed by persons, who have come face to face with an incident unacceptable to them, who are rendered, incapable of self-control for the duration of the act." In recent decades and women's rights organizations have worked to change laws and social norms which tolerate crimes of passion against women. UN Women has urged states to review legal defenses of passion and provocation, other similar laws, to ensure that such laws do not lead to impunity in regard to violence against women, stating that "laws should state that these defenses do not include or apply to crimes of “honour”, adultery, or domestic assault or murder."There are differences between crimes of passion and honour killings, as "while crimes of passion may be seen as somewhat premeditated to a certain extent, honour killings are deliberate, well planned and premeditated acts when a person kills a female relative ostensibly to uphold his honour."
However, Widney Brown, advocacy director for Human Rights Watch, argued that "crimes of passion have a similar dynamic in that the women are killed by male family members and the crimes are perceived as excusable or understandable". Some human rights advocates say; the Council of Europe Recommendation Rec5 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the protection of women against violence states that member states should "preclude adultery as an excuse for violence within the family". In Australia, as in other common law jurisdictions, crimes of passion have traditionally been subjected to the partial defense of provocation, which converts what would have been murder into manslaughter. In recent years, the defense of provocation has come under increased criticism, and, as a result, legal changes have abolished or restricted its application: in 2003, Tasmania became the first state to abolish the partial defense of provocation. ACT and Northern Territory have amended the laws to exclude non-violent homosexual sexual advances, in 2004 and 2006, respectively.
In Queensland the partial defense of provocation in section 304 of the Criminal Code was amended in 2011, in order to "reduce the scope of the defense being available to those who kill out of sexual possessiveness or jealousy". In 2014, the New South Wales law on provocation was amended to provide that the provocative conduct of the deceased must have constituted a serious indictable offense. Killing of wives due to adultery has been traditionally treated leniently in Brazil, in court cases where husbands claimed the "legitimate defense of their honor" as justification for the killing. Although this defense was not explicitly stipulated in the 20th-century Criminal Code, it has been pleaded by lawyers throughout the 20th century, in particular in the interior of the country, though less so in the coastal big cities. In 1991 Brazil’s Supreme Court explicitly rejected the "honor defense" as having no basis in Brazilian law. Prior to 1975, the French Penal Code of 1810 allowed lighter sentences for crimes of passion.
Article 324 permitted the murders of an unfaithful wife and her lover at the hand of her husband, though only "at the moment" when the wife and her lover were " in the fact" by the husband in the matrimonial home. On November 7, 1975, Law no. 617/75 Article 17 repealed Article 324. Many countries, including some western countries like Belgium, were influenced by the Article 324. Prior to 1997, Belgian law provided for mitigating circumstances in the case of a killing or assault against a spouse caught in the act of adultery. In Luxembourg, Article 413 provided mitigating circumstances for murder
A murder–suicide is an act in which an individual kills one or more people before killing themself. The combination of murder and suicide can take various forms linked to the first form: Murder linked with suicide of a mentally unstable person with a homicidal ideation. Many spree killings have ended in suicide, such as in many school shootings; some cases of religiously-motivated suicides may involve murder. All categorization amounts to forming somewhat arbitrary distinctions where relating to intention in the case of psychosis, where the intention is/are more than not to be irrational. Ascertaining the legal intention is inapplicable to cases properly categorized as insanity. According to the psychiatrist Karl A. Menninger and suicide are interchangeable acts – suicide sometimes forestalling murder, vice versa. Following Freudian logic, severe repression of natural instincts due to early childhood abuse, may lead the death instinct to emerge in a twisted form; the cultural anthropologist Ernest Becker, whose theories on the human notion of death is influenced by Freud, views the fear of death as a universal phenomenon, a fear repressed in the unconscious and of which people are unaware.
This fear can move individuals toward heroism, but to scapegoating. Failed attempts to achieve heroism, according to this view, can lead to mental illness and/or antisocial behavior. In a study related to murder–suicide, Milton Rosenbaum discovered the murder–suicide perpetrators to be vastly different from perpetrators of homicide alone. Whereas murderer–suicides were found to be depressed and overwhelmingly men, other murderers were not depressed and more to include women in their ranks. In the U. S. the overwhelming number of cases are male-on-female. Around one-third of partner homicides end in the suicide of the perpetrator. From national and international data and interviews with family members of murder–suicide perpetrators, the following are the key predictors of murder–suicide: a history of substance abuse, the male partner some years older than the female partner, a break-up or pending break-up, a history of battering, suicidal contemplation by the perpetrator. Though there is no national tracking system for murder–suicides in the United States, medical studies into the phenomenon estimate between 1,000 and 1,500 deaths per year in the US, with the majority occurring between spouses or intimate partners and the vast majority of the perpetrators being male.
Depression, marital or/and financial problems, other problems are motivators. Homicides which are followed by suicide make headline news; the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control reports that an estimated 1 million adults reported attempting suicide in 2011, there were over 38,000 completed suicides in the same period; the estimate of 624 murder-suicide events per year, indicates that murders are associated with suicidal events only about 0.06% of the time. In 18th-century Denmark, people wishing to commit suicide would sometimes commit murder in order to receive the death penalty, they believed murder followed by repentance would allow them to end their life while avoiding damnation. Crime of passion Mass murder School shooting Serial killer Spree killer Shinjū Suicide attack Suicide by pilot van Wormer, K.. Death by Domestic Violence: Preventing the Murders and Murder–Suicides. Westport, CT: Praeger
Blood libel or ritual murder libel is an antisemitic canard falsely accusing Jews of kidnapping and murdering Christian children in order to use their blood as part of religious rituals. These claims—alongside those of well poisoning and host desecration—have been a major theme of the persecution of Jews in Europe. Blood libels say that Jews require human blood for the baking of matzos for Passover, although this element was absent in the earliest cases which claimed that then-contemporary Jews reenacted the crucifixion; the accusations assert that the blood of the children of Christians is coveted, blood libel claims have been made in order to account for the otherwise unexplained deaths of children. In some cases, the alleged victim of human sacrifice has become venerated as a martyr, a holy figure around whom a martyr sect might arise. Three of these – William of Norwich, Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln, Simon of Trent – became objects of local sects and veneration, in some cases they were added to the General Roman Calendar.
One, Gavriil Belostoksky, was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church. In Jewish lore, blood libels were the impetus for the creation of the Golem of Prague by Rabbi Judah Loew ben Bezalel in the 16th century. According to Walter Laqueur: Altogether, there have been about 150 recorded cases of blood libel that resulted in the arrest and killing of Jews throughout history, most of them in the Middle Ages. In every case, Jews were murdered, sometimes by a mob, sometimes following torture and a trial; the term'blood libel' has been used to refer to any unpleasant or damaging false accusation, it has taken on a broader metaphorical meaning. However, this usage remains controversial, Jewish groups have objected to such usage; the supposed torture and human sacrifice alleged in the blood libels run contrary to the teachings of Judaism. According to the Bible, God commanded Abraham in the Binding of Isaac to sacrifice his son, but He provided a ram as a substitute; the Ten Commandments in the Torah forbid murder.
In addition, the use of blood in cooking is prohibited by the kosher dietary laws. Blood from slaughtered animals may not be consumed, it must be drained out of the animal and covered with earth. According to the Book of Leviticus, blood from sacrificed animals may only be placed on the altar of the Great Temple in Jerusalem. Furthermore, the consumption of human flesh would violate kashrut. Stated in Leviticus is that "it shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations, in all your settlements: you must not eat any fat or any blood," and that "you must not eat any blood whatever, either of bird or of animal, in any of your settlements."While animal sacrifice was part of the practice of ancient Judaism, the Tanakh and Jewish teachings portray human sacrifice as one of the evils that separated the pagans of Canaan from the Hebrews. Jews were prohibited from engaging in these rituals and they were punished for doing so. In fact, ritual cleanliness for priests prohibited them from being in the same room with a human corpse.
The earliest versions of the accusation involved Jews crucifying Christian children on Easter/Passover because of a prophecy. There is no reference to the use of blood in unleavened matzo bread, which evolves as a major motivation for the crime; the earliest known example of a blood libel is from a certain Democritus only mentioned by the Suda, who alleged that "every seven years the Jews captured a stranger, brought him to the temple in Jerusalem, sacrificed him, cutting his flesh into bits." The Graeco-Egyptian author Apion claimed. This accusation is known from Josephus' rebuttal of it in Against Apion. Apion states that when Antiochus Epiphanes entered the temple in Jerusalem, he discovered a Greek captive who told him that he was being fattened for sacrifice; every year, Apion claimed, the Jews would sacrifice a Greek and consume his flesh, at the same time swearing eternal hatred towards the Greeks. Apion's claim repeats ideas in circulation because similar claims are made by Posidonius and Apollonius Molon in the 1st century BCE.
Another example concerns the murder of a Christian boy by a group of Jewish youths. Socrates Scholasticus reported that some Jews in a drunken frolic bound a Christian child on a cross in mockery of the death of Christ and scourged him until he died. Professor Israel Jacob Yuval of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem published an article in 1993 which argues that the blood libel may have originated in the 12th century from Christian views of Jewish behavior during the First Crusade; some Jews committed suicide and killed their own children rather than be subjected to forced conversions. Yuval investigated Christian reports of these events and stated that they were distorted with claims that if Jews could kill their own children, they could kill the children of Christians. Yuval rejects the blood libel story as a fantasy of some Christians which could not contain any element of truth in it due to the precarious nature of the Jewish minority's existence in Christian Europe. In England in 1144, the Jews of Norwich were accused of ritual murder after a boy, William of Norwich, was found dead with stab wounds in the woods.
William's hagiographer, Thomas of Monmouth, claimed that every year there is an international council of Jews at which they
A serial killer is a person who murders three or more people in service of abnormal psychological gratification, with the murders taking place over more than a month and including a significant period of time between them. Different authorities apply different criteria. While most set a threshold of three murders, others lessen it to two; the Federal Bureau of Investigation defines serial killing as "a series of two or more murders, committed as separate events but not always, by one offender acting alone". Although psychological gratification is the usual motive for serial killing, most serial killings involve sexual contact with the victim, the FBI states that the motives of serial killers can include anger, thrill-seeking, financial gain, attention seeking; the murders may be completed in a similar fashion. The victims may have something in common, for example, demographic profile, gender or race. A serial killer is neither a mass murderer, nor a spree killer, although there may be conceptual overlaps between serial killers and spree killers.
The English term and concept of serial killer are attributed to former FBI Special agent Robert Ressler who used the term serial homicide in 1974 in a lecture at Bramshill Police Academy in Britain. Author Ann Rule postulates in her book, Kiss Me, Kill Me, that the English-language credit for coining the term goes to LAPD detective Pierce Brooks, who created the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program system in 1985. There is ample evidence the term was used in the United States earlier; the German term and concept were coined by criminologist Ernst Gennat, who described Peter Kürten as a Serienmörder in his article "Die Düsseldorfer Sexualverbrechen". The earliest usage attested of the specific term serial killer listed in the Oxford English Dictionary was from a 1960s German film article written by Siegfried Kracauer, about the German expressionist film M, portraying a pedophilic Serienmörder. In his book, Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters, criminal justice historian Peter Vronsky notes that while Ressler might have coined the English term "serial homicide" within law in 1974, the terms serial murder and serial murderer appear in John Brophy's book The Meaning of Murder.
The Washington DC newspaper Evening Star, in a 1967 review of the book: There is the mass murderer, or what he calls the "serial" killer, who may be actuated by greed, such as insurance, or retention or growth of power, like the Medicis of Renaissance Italy, or Landru, the "bluebeard" of the World War I period, who murdered numerous wives after taking their money. This use of "serial" killer to paraphrase Brophy's serial murderer does not appear to have been influential at the time. In his more recent study, Vronsky states that the term serial killing first entered into broader American popular usage when published in The New York Times in the spring of 1981, to describe Atlanta serial killer Wayne Williams. Subsequently, throughout the 1980s, the term was used again in the pages of The New York Times, one of the major national news publication of the United States, on 233 occasions. By the end of the 1990s, the use of the term had escalated to 2,514 instances in the paper; when defining serial killers, researchers use "three or more murders" as the baseline, considering it sufficient to provide a pattern without being overly restrictive.
Independent of the number of murders, they need to have been committed at different times, are committed in different places. The lack of a cooling-off period marks the difference between a serial killer; the category has, been found to be of no real value to law enforcement, because of definitional problems relating to the concept of a "cooling-off period". Cases of extended bouts of sequential killings over periods of weeks or months with no apparent "cooling off period" or "return to normality" have caused some experts to suggest a hybrid category of "spree-serial killer". In 2005, the FBI hosted a multi-disciplinary symposium in San Antonio, which brought together 135 experts on serial murder from a variety of fields and specialties with the goal of identifying the commonalities of knowledge regarding serial murder; the group settled on a definition of serial murder which FBI investigators accept as their standard: "The unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender in separate events."
The definition does not consider motivation for define a cooling-off period. Historical criminologists have suggested that there may have been serial murders throughout history, but specific cases were not adequately recorded; some sources suggest that legends such as werewolves and vampires were inspired by medieval serial killers. In Africa, there have been periodic outbreaks of murder by Leopard men. Liu Pengli of China, nephew of the Han Emperor Jing, was made Prince of Jidong in the sixth year of the middle period of Jing's reign. According to the Chinese historian Sima Qian, he would "go out on marauding expeditions with 20 or 30 slaves or with young men who were in hiding from the law, murdering people and seizing their belongings for sheer sport". Although many of his subjects knew about these murders, it was not until the 29th year of his reign that the son of one of his victims sent a report to the Emperor, it was discovered that he had murdered at least 100 people. The officials of the court requested.
In the 15th
Child sacrifice is the ritualistic killing of children in order to please or appease a god or supernatural beings in order to achieve a desired result. As such, it is a form of human sacrifice; the practice has received considerable opposition throughout history, it has become a target for those engaged in criticism of religion. Child sacrifice is thought to be an extreme extension of the idea that, the more important the object of sacrifice, the more devout the person giving it up is. Archeologists have found the remains of more than 140 children who were sacrificed in Peru's northern coastal region. Archeologists have found remains of 42 children, it is alleged that these remains were sacrificed to Tlaloc in the offerings of the Great Pyramid of Tenochtitlan by the Aztecs of pre-Columbian Mexico. Human sacrifice was an everyday activity in Tenochtitlan and children were not exempt. They, in particular, were offered to the god of rain. Bernardino de Sahagún, a religious man left writings that describe such sacrifices, compiled from the first-hand accounts of natives who had lived in Tenochtitlan in the times before it fell.
Hernán Cortés himself mentioned child sacrifices in his letters to King Carlos I of Spain. The Inca culture sacrificed, their frozen corpses have been discovered in the South American mountaintops. The first of these corpses, a female child who had died from a blow to the skull, was discovered in 1995 by Johan Reinhard. Other methods of sacrifice included strangulation and leaving the children, given an intoxicating drink, to lose consciousness in the extreme cold and low-oxygen conditions of the mountaintop, to die of hypothermia. In Maya culture, people believed that supernatural beings had power over their lives and this is one reason that child sacrifice occurred; the sacrifices were to satisfy the supernatural beings. This was done through k'ex, an exchange or substitution of something. Through k’ex infants would substitute more powerful humans, it was thought that supernatural beings would consume the souls of more powerful humans and infants were substituted in order to prevent that. Infants are believed to be good offerings because they have a close connection to the spirit world through liminality.
It is believed that parents in Maya culture would offer their children for sacrifice and depictions of this show that this was a emotional time for the parents, but they would carry through because they thought the child would continue existing. It is known that infant sacrifices occurred at certain times. Child sacrifice was preferred when there was a time of crisis and transitional times such as famine and drought. There is archaeological evidence of infant sacrifice in tombs where the infant has been buried in urns or ceramic vessels. There have been depictions of child sacrifice in art; some art includes pottery and steles as well as references to infant sacrifice in mythology and art depictions of the mythology. The Moche of northern Peru practiced mass sacrifices of boys; the Timoto-Cuicas offered human sacrifices. Until colonial times children sacrifice persisted secretly in Laguna de Urao, it were described by the chronicler Juan de Castellanos, who cited that feasts and human sacrifices were done in honour of Icaque, an Andean prehispanic goddess.
References in the Tanakh point to an awareness of human sacrifice in the history of ancient Near Eastern practice. The king of Moab gives his firstborn heir as a whole burnt offering. In the book of the prophet Micah, the question is asked,'Shall I give my firstborn for my sin, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?', responded to in the phrase,'He has shown all you people what is good. And what does Yahweh require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.' The Tanakh implies that the Ammonites offered child sacrifices to Moloch. In Leviticus 18:21, 20:3 and Deuteronomy 12:30-31, 18:10, the Torah contains a number of imprecations against and laws forbidding child sacrifice and human sacrifice in general; the Tanakh denounces human sacrifice as barbaric customs of Baal worshippers. James Kugel argues that the Torah's forbidding child sacrifice indicates that it happened in Israel as well. Mark S. Smith argues that the mention of "Topeth" in Isaiah 30:27–33 indicates an acceptance of child sacrifice in the early Jerusalem practices, to which the law in Leviticus 20:2–5 forbidding child sacrifice is a response.
Some scholars have stated that at least some Israelites and Judahites believed child sacrifice was a legitimate religious practice. Genesis relates the binding of Isaac, by Abraham to present his son, Isaac, as a sacrifice on Mount Moriah. No reason is given within the text. Abraham agrees to this command without arguing; the story ends with an angel stopping Abraham at the last minute and making Isaac's sacrifice unnecessary by providing a ram, caught in some nearby bushes, to be sacrificed instead. Francesca Stavrakopoulou has speculated that it is possible that the story "contains traces of a tradition in which Abraham does sacrifice Isaac". Rabbi A. I. Kook, first Chief Rabbi of Israel, stressed that the climax of the story, commanding Abraham not to sacrifice Isaac, is the whole point: to put an end to the ritual of child sacrifice, which contradicts the morality of a perfect and giving monotheistic God. According to Irving Greenberg the story of the binding of Isaac, symbolizes the prohibition to worship God by human sacrifices, at a time when human sacrifices were the norm worldwide.
The most extensive accounts of child sacrifice in the Hebrew Bible refer to thos
Uxoricide is murder of one's wife or romantic partner. It can refer to the act the person who carries it out; the killing of a husband is called mariticide. Though overall rates of spousal violence and homicide in the US have declined since the 1970s, rates of uxoricide are much higher than rates of mariticide. Of the 2340 deaths at the hands of intimate partners in America in 2007, female victims made up 70%. FBI data from the mid-1970s to mid-1980s found that for every 100 husbands who killed their wives in the United States, about 75 women killed their husbands. However, wives were more to kill their husbands than vice-versa in some US cities including Chicago and Houston, and in St. Louis. Uxoricide rates varied among different demographic subgroups, being about 8.5 times more common among African-Americans than among white Americans, about 7.5 times more common in interracial marriages. In the region of South-East Asia, 55% of all murdered women died at the hands of their partner, followed by 40% in the African region and 38% in the Americas.
Preliminary findings of an ongoing study estimate that globally 35% of murders of women are committed by intimate partners. Rates of uxoricide seem to fluctuate across western cultures, with seven women being killed per month in England and Wales four women per month in Australia, 76 women per month in the United States. Note that these data come from different years, that the United States has a much higher population than the UK or Australia. Proponents of psychodynamic theories have offered explanations for the mechanisms underlying the occurrence of uxoricide, it has been suggested that men who kill their partners experience both an unconscious dependence on their wife and a resentment of her. These men wish to leave the relationship, but unknowingly perceive themselves as too helpless to do so, which culminates into a belief that killing the wife is the only way to be free of her; this approach offers an alternative explanation for instances where a man commits uxoricide and subsequent immediate suicide – the man ends his life not due to guilt, but instead due to his perceived helplessness and dependency.
Links have been established between violence in childhood and likelihood of uxoricide occurring. Psychodynamic researchers argue that being the victim of abuse in childhood leads to being a perpetrator of domestic abuse in adulthood via the route of defence mechanisms – in this case, violence is an unconscious defensive adaption to childhood trauma and other adverse events. Other psychodynamic researchers have reported that Thematic Apperception tests reveal significant trends of rejection by a mother or wife in men who commit uxoricide. Psychoanalytic dream interpretation has argued that unconscious conflict manifests into violent outbursts. For example, in one instance one man had experienced and recorded over 200 distressing violent dreams prior to murdering his wife. In more than two-thirds of US spousal homicides, a verbal disagreement escalated to homicide. Cohabiting women are at greater risk of domestic uxoricide than married women. Research has found that cohabiting women are nine times more to be killed by their intimate partner than married women.
A number of possible reasons for this finding have been studied. Cohabiting women are more to be younger, have a lower level of education and are more to bring children from a previous relationship into their home with their new intimate partner. In addition to this heightened risk to a mother with stepchildren, the genetically unrelated stepfather poses a risk to the child; this may be. Research has found that the presence of stepchildren can increase the risk of uxoricide for women. A large number of filicides are accompanied by suicide. Additionally, cohabiting relationships have higher separation rates and males in these types of relationships may not feel in control of their intimate partners and may feel threatened by male sexual competitors. Research has found that a large proportion of uxoricide cases follow on from the male believing that his female intimate partner has been unfaithful or the female partner attempting to end the relationship. Research has shown that females experience increased abuse following the termination of a relationship.
An Australian study found that of a sample of uxoricide cases, 47% of women were murdered by their male intimate partner within two months of separating. Sexual jealousy may be a possible reason for this heightened risk following separation. Another risk factor for uxoricide is estrangement. Women who choose to leave their partner are at higher risk of spousal homicide; these crimes have been termed "abandonment homicides," and are most committed by men with childhood histories of abandonment and trauma, in conjunction with markedly low serotonin levels and frontal cortex damage that contribute to poor impulse control. The male is more to kill his mate before she has had the chance to form a new relationship with another man as he fears she will devote her reproductive resources to a male rival's offspring. Therefore, by killing his partner he will avoid the reputational damage associated with intrasexual competition and will eliminate the chances of another man having access to a high value mate.
This explains why those women who have had children from a previous relationship are at higher risk
Homicide is the act of one human killing another. A homicide requires only a volitional act by another person that results in death, thus a homicide may result from accidental, reckless, or negligent acts if there is no intent to cause harm. Homicides can be divided into many overlapping legal categories, including murder, justifiable homicide, killing in war and capital punishment, depending on the circumstances of the death; these different types of homicides are treated differently in human societies. Criminal homicide takes many forms including purposeful murder. Criminal homicide is divided into two broad categories and manslaughter, based upon the state of mind and intent of the person who commits the homicide. Murder is the most serious crime. In many jurisdictions, homicide may be punished by life in prison or capital punishment. Although categories of murder can vary by jurisdiction, murder charges fall under two broad categories: First degree murder: the premeditated, intentional killing of another person.
Second degree murder: The intentional, unlawful killing of another person, but without any premeditation. In some jurisdictions, a homicide that occurs during the commission of a dangerous crime may constitute murder, regardless of the actor's intent to commit homicide. In the United States, this is known as the felony murder rule. In simple terms, under the felony murder rule a person who commits a felony may be guilty of murder if someone dies as a result of the commission of the crime, including the victim of the felony, a bystander or a co-felon, regardless their intent—or lack thereof—to kill, when the death results from the actions of a co-defendant or third party, reacting to the crime. Manslaughter is a form of homicide in which the person who commits the homicide either does not intend to kill the victim, or kills the victim as the result of circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to become or mentally disturbed to the point of losing control of their actions; the distinction between murder and manslaughter is sometimes said to have first been made by the ancient Athenian lawmaker Draco in the 7th century BC.
The penalty for manslaughter is less than the penalty for murder. The two broad categories of manslaughter are: Voluntary manslaughter: the intentional, unpremeditated killing of another person as the result of a disturbed state of mind, or heat of passion. Involuntary manslaughter: the unintentional killing of another person through an act of recklessness that shows indifference to the lives and safety of others, or an act of negligence that could reasonably be foreseen to result in death; the act that results in death may be intentional, such as pushing somebody in anger, but their death is not. Another form of manslaughter in some jurisdictions is constructive manslaughter, which may be charged in the event that a person causes a death without intention, but as the result of violating an important safety law or regulation. Not all homicides are crimes, or subject to criminal prosecution; some are privileged, meaning that they are not criminal acts at all. Others may occur under circumstances that provide the defendant with a full or partial defense to criminal prosecution.
Common defenses include: Self-defense: while most homicides by civilians are criminally prosecutable, a right of self-defense is recognized, including, in dire circumstances, the use of deadly force. Mental incapacity: A defendant may attempt to prove that they are not criminally responsible for a homicide due to a mental disorder. In some jurisdictions, mentally incompetent killers may be involuntarily committed in lieu of criminal trial. Mental health and development are taken into account during sentencing. For example, in the United States, the death penalty cannot be applied to convicted murderers with intellectual disabilities.if the defendant in a capital case is sufficiently mentally disabled in the United States they cannot be executed. Instead, the individual is placed under the category of "insane". Defense of infancy - Small children are not held criminally liable before the age of criminal responsibility. A juvenile court may handle defendants above this age but below the legal age of majority, though because homicide is a serious crime some older minors are charged in an adult justice system.
Age is sometimes taken into account during sentencing if the perpetrator is old enough to have criminal responsibility. Justifiable homicide or privilege: Due to the circumstances, although a homicide occurs, the act of killing is not unlawful. For example, a killing on the battlefield during war is lawful, or a police officer may shoot a dangerous suspect in order to protect the officer's own life or the lives and safety of others; the availability of defenses to a criminal charge following a homicide may affect the homicide rate. For example, it has been suggested that the availability of "stand your ground" defense has resulted in an increase in the homicide rate in U. S. jurisdictions. Killing by governments and the agents thereof may be considered lawful or unlawful according to: Domestic law International law to which the government has agreed by treaty Peremptory norms which are de facto enforced as obligatory on all countries, such as prohibitions against genocide and slaveryTypes of state killings include: Capital