Law
Murder in Law
"Murder in Law" refers to the legal concept of murder as defined and prosecuted within the framework of the law. It encompasses the intentional and unlawful killing of another person, with specific legal criteria and elements that must be proven in order to establish guilt. The legal definition of murder varies by jurisdiction, but generally involves premeditation and malice aforethought.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
10 Key excerpts on "Murder in Law"
eBook - PDF- Lawrence Atsegbua, Violet Aigbokhaevbo, Sunday Daudu(Authors)
- 2022(Publication Date)
- Malthouse Press(Publisher)
We will also consider the two major classifications of homicide, i.e., murder and manslaughter and the legal basis for such classification will also be examined. MURDER MURDER MURDER MURDER Murder is the killing of a human being with malice aforethought. But according to Coke, murder is when a man of sound memory and of the age of discretion unlawfully kills within any country of the realm any reasonable creature is rerem natura under the King’s breach, with malice aforethought, either expressed by the party or implied by law, so as the party wounded, or hurt, etc., dies of the wound or hurt, etc., within a year and a day after the same. Section 308 of the Criminal Code provides that any person who causes the death of another, directly or indirectly, by any means whatever is deemed to have killed that other person. Also, section 220 of the Penal Code provides that whoever causes death: (a) by doing an act with the intention of causing death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death; or (b) by doing an act with the knowledge that he is likely to cause death; or (c) by doing a rash or negligent act commits the offence of culpable homicide. Also, if a person who is charged with the duties to provide necessaries of life fails to do that to any person under him or her by virtue of age, sickness, unsoundness of mind, detention or any other cause and as a result of that omission a Criminal Law in Nigeria: A Modern Approach 106 consequence affects the life or health of that person, he or she will be held guilty. Again, section 302 of the Criminal Code imposes a heavy duty on masters or mistresses who have contracted to provide necessary food, clothing or lodging for any servant or apprentice under the age of 16 years. Hence, if death occurs as a result of this omission, such a master or mistress will be guilty of homicide.
eBook - PDF- Peter Morrall(Author)
- 2006(Publication Date)
- Wiley(Publisher)
Although frequently used as synonyms, there is generally in the world’s legal systems, and in particular Anglo-American law, a distinction made between ‘murder’ and ‘homicide’. Murder is not legally neutral and does imply a moral judgement as it is the outcome of judicial processes. Homi-cide is usually the term adopted at the beginning of inquiries into a death where natural causes are not blatant. Murder is the illegal and intentional killing of a human being by one or more human beings. ‘Malice afore-thought’ is the key criterion in the legal definition of murder (Blom-Cooper & Morris, 2004). The term ‘murder’ derives from Saxon times (Blom-Cooper & Morris, 2004). After the conquest of Britain in 1066, disgruntled Saxons engaged in ambushes on the Normans. So outraged was William I about what probably 26 MURDER AND SOCIETY would in the twenty-first century be described as ‘terrorist outrages’ that he decreed if the perpetrator of such a killing (a murdrum ) were not found then a hundred people who lived where the death had taken place were required to pay a fine, also known as a murdrum . It wasn’t until 1340 that this collec-tive punishment for unsolved homicides was rescinded. In English Law, the legal category of homicide includes the offences of murder, infanticide and manslaughter, whereas in some parts of the USA homicides that are justifi-able (killing in self-defence) are demarcated from those that are unjustifiable. In Scotland, criminal homicide is, as with the many states in the USA, dis-tinguished from non-criminal homicide, where the notion of ‘culpable homi-cide’ is employed. Taking the classic definition of murder used in English law, reference is made to the unlawful killing with malice aforethought of ‘any reasonable creature in rerum natura ’ (i.e. a living human being).
No longer available |Learn more- (Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Orange Apple(Publisher)
________________________ WORLD TECHNOLOGIES ________________________ Chapter- 3 Murder & Hate Crime Murder Murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter). As the loss of a human being inflicts enormous grief upon the individuals close to the victim, as well as the fact that the commission of a murder is highly detrimental to the good order within society, most societies both present and in antiquity have considered it a most serious crime worthy of the harshest of punishment. In most countries, a person convicted of murder is typically given a long prison sentence, possibly a life sentence where permitted, and in some countries, the death penalty may be imposed for such an act. A person who commits murder is called a murderer. Legal analysis of murder William Blackstone (citing Edward Coke), in his Commentaries on the Laws of England set out the common law definition of murder as when a person, of sound memory and discretion, unlawfully killeth any reasonable cre-ature in being and under the king's peace, with malice aforethought, either express or implied. The elements of common law murder are: 1. unlawful 2. Killing 3. of a human being 4. with malice aforethought. The killing —At common law life ended with cardiopulmonary arrest—the total and permanent cessation of blood circulation and respiration. With advances in medical technology courts have adopted irreversible cessation of all brain function as marking the end of life. ________________________ WORLD TECHNOLOGIES ________________________ of a human being —This element presents the issue of when life begins. At common law a fetus was not a human being. Life began when the fetus passed through the birth canal and took its first breath. by another human being —at early common law suicide was considered murder.
eBook - ePubFine Lines and Distinctions
Murder, Manslaughter and the UnLawful Taking of Human Life
- Morris, Terrence, Blom-Cooper, Louis(Authors)
- 2011(Publication Date)
- Waterside Press(Publisher)
The mechanistically repetitive statement that murder, no matter the circumstances of the criminal event, is the most heinous of all crimes, and that it must be sharply distinguished from all other forms of unlawful homicide, is thoroughly discredited. Given the variables in homicidal events and the moral opprobrium attaching to any one individual killer, there is no need in contemporary society to label unlawful killings other than by the rubric of a single crime. This chapter seeks to demonstrate both the variable nature of homicides and the moral responsibility for each case.The traditional (or old) definition of the offence of murder was unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, resulting in the death of the victim within a year and a day (a time-limit that no longer applies). In modern times, the emphasis has invariably focused on the state of mind of the accused (the malice aforethought). It is a common misapprehension among non-lawyers that a person can be convicted of murder only if it is proved that the accused intended to kill; in fact only a minority of people convicted of murder possess that extreme intent. It is sufficient for the prosecution to prove an intention to cause really serious injury. If death ensues, however unexpected, unpremeditated, or lacking in intention to kill, the offence of murder is made out, and the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment must follow. It is thus possible to commit a murder not only without wishing the death of the victim but also without the least thought that this might be the result of the assault. Few people would think that this represents a notion of justice.By contrast, where the accused is charged only with an attempt to murder, it is necessary for the prosecution to prove a specific intent to kill; an intention to cause serious injury will not suffice. The case of Dr Nigel Cox points up the absurd illogicality of the law. Dr Cox was tried and found guilty of the attempted murder of a terminally-ill patient by giving her a an injection which had lethal consequences, for which offence he received a 12-month suspended sentence. Had the prosecution been for murder, it would have been necessary only to show that he intended to cause her serious harm.6
eBook - PDF- Daniel E. Hall(Author)
- 2022(Publication Date)
- Cengage Learning EMEA(Publisher)
Homicide by any means satisfies the actus reus. It can be direct through the use of poison, a knife, gun, crossbow, or other object. It is also possible to be liable for the death of a person who causes their own death. In one case, for example, a husband who repeatedly hit his wife and commanded her to jump into a river was convicted of murder when she drowned. 1 Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. Chapter 4 Crimes Against the Person 77 One of the attendant circumstances of murder is the victim’s death. The defi- nition of death has evolved. For a long time, death was defined as the cessation of blood flow and respiration. This definition proved inadequate when medicine developed the ability to maintain blood circulation and respiration, but the patient had no hope of recovering brain function. Consequently, either brain death or a combination of the cessation of brain, circulation, and respiration functions are used to determine death. The mens rea of murder was malice aforethought. There are two parts to this element, malice and aforethought. Once defined in an entirely moral way—to act out of an evil or ill will—malice developed into a cognitive, mental construct. Malice was a form of specific intent; the defendant’s purpose had to be cause of the victim’s death. The morality of the act became largely irrelevant. The timing of this intent was important. It had to occur “aforethought,” or before the act. The aforethought requirement is often expressed as acting with premeditation.
eBook - ePubJudging Evil
Rethinking the Law of Murder and Manslaughter
- Samuel H. Pillsbury(Author)
- 2000(Publication Date)
- NYU Press(Publisher)
Although English law has never formally included a rule of premeditation, early English murder definitions contained similar ideas. 3 In pre-Norman times “murth” or “murther” meant a secret killing. 4 Secrecy implied (although it did not require) planning, an activity suggestive of reflection and cool emotion at the time of killing. English common law later emphasized malice prepense, also called malice aforethought, as the defining element of murder. In its original usage, malice aforethought emphasized planning. The term may have come from the Old Testament admonition that, “if a man shall kill his neighbor deliberately and by lying in wait, thou shalt take him from mine altar that he may die.” 5 By contrast, English law deemed a purposeful killing to be manslaughter when it was committed in the heat of passion. As we will see in the next chapter, English law declared voluntary manslaughter a less serious offense than murder because, although purposeful, it was committed upon “chance-medley,” that is, in the heat of a physical altercation, 6 or upon stark and immediate provocation, such as a husband’s discovery of his wife in the act of adultery. 7 The American doctrine of premeditation dates back to the late eighteenth century. Following the American Revolution, the new states embarked on a program of criminal justice reforms, hoping to rid their laws of the “sanguinary” punishments of “despotic” England
eBook - PDFCriminal Law Handbook, The
Know Your Rights, Survive the System
- Paul Bergman, Sara J. Berman(Authors)
- 2024(Publication Date)
- NOLO(Publisher)
Malice aforethought can also exist if: • a killer intentionally inflicts very serious bodily harm that causes a victim’s death, or • a killer’s behavior, which demonstrates extreme reckless disregard for the value of human life, results in a victim’s death. Under this scheme, intent to do serious bodily harm and extreme reckless disregard are legally equivalent to an intent to kill. To be consistent, from here on, we’ll refer to murders as intentional killings. If a victim is dead in any event, why distinguish between first-degree and second-degree murder? Even within the universe of those who kill unlawfully and with malice aforethought, the law regards some killers as more dangerous and morally blameworthy than others; this group can be convicted of first-degree murder. Unlawful and intentional killings that don’t constitute first-degree murder are second-degree murder. The rules vary somewhat from state to state as to what circumstances make an intentional killing first-degree murder. The following circumstances are common: • The killing is deliberate and premedi- tated. In other words, the killer plans the crime ahead of time. For example, premeditation exists if a wife goes to the store, buys a lethal dose of rat poison, and puts it in her husband’s tea. • The victim is a peace officer, a judge, or an elected representative. • The killer uses an explosive device such as a bomb. What is the felony-murder rule? Felony-murder rules typically provide that, when a death occurs during the commission of a dangerous felony, a felon is guilty of murder. If two individuals carry out a dangerous felony jointly, each may be convicted of murder under the rule, even when only one of them was the actual killer. Indeed, in some jurisdictions, a felon may be convicted of murder even if a death that occurs during the course of a felony is accidental and unintended, or carried out by someone other than the felon.
eBook - PDFScots Criminal Law
A Critical Analysis
- Pamela R. Ferguson, Claire McDiarmid(Authors)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- EUP(Publisher)
The concept of “wicked recklessness” may work quite effectively in answering this question. 9.14 CRITIQUE OF THE LAW ON MURDER AND PROPOSALS FOR REFORM There is, undoubtedly, an issue as to whether anything other than an intention to kill ought to be sufficient to constitute the mens rea of murder. The (English) Law Commission ultimately answered that question by dividing murder into two categories of seriousness. 184 “First degree murder” would require such an intention or intent to do serious injury in the awareness of a serious risk of causing death. “Second degree murder” would include killing with an intention to cause serious bodily harm, killing through intention to cause injury or fear or risk of injury in the awareness of a serious risk of causing death, and killing where there is a partial defence available, such as provocation. Thus, an intention to kill separates off the most serious crime, yet several other forms of killing are still labelled as murder, including those which would not previously have so ranked. The Draft Criminal Code defines the mens rea of murder without using “wicked intent” or “wicked recklessness”. Under the Code’s provisions, murder requires intention to cause death, or “callous recklessness” as to whether death is caused. 185 “Callous recklessness” is intended to suggest an extreme disregard for human life. There is a strong element of objectivity; a person who ought to have foreseen that her behaviour could prove fatal will, prima facie , have satisfied the mens rea for murder, but the term does not necessarily exclude recognition of some level of (subjective) acceptance of the risk of death. The matter would turn on the court’s interpretation. The Code also proposes a change in the penalty on conviction for murder: “life imprisonment” becomes the maximum, rather than the mandatory, 183 Gordon (2001), para 23.21. 184 Law Commission (2006), particularly paras 2.23–2.116. 185 Draft Criminal Code , s 37. 9.14.1 9.14.2
eBook - PDFThe Concept of Mens Rea in International Criminal Law
The Case for a Unified Approach
- Mohamed Elewa Badar(Author)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- Hart Publishing(Publisher)
83 However, recklessness is a sufficient fault element for some serious crimes other than murder such as unlawful wounding, and some less serious crimes such as common law assault. G The Meaning of Intention in the Criminal Law of Ireland In Ireland, there are ongoing attempts by the Law Reform Commission to expand the definition of murder in a way that would capture situations such as when an accused fired a gun at a moving vehicle but claims that he neither intended to kill or cause serious injury to anyone, nor foresaw death as a probable consequence of his actions. In so doing, the Commission recommended that murder should encapsulate the American Model Penal Code definition of recklessness which amounts to extreme indifference to human life. 84 81 Law Commission Report, Murder, Manslaughter and Infanticide , Project 6 of the Ninth Programme of Law Reform: Homicide (Law Com No 304) para 3.13, 58–59, 28 November 2006, available at: www. lawcom.gov.uk. 82 R v Woollin [1998] 4 All ER 103. See also Law Reform Commission (Ireland), Report on Homicide: Murder and Involuntary Manslaughter (LCR 87-2008) 26, para 2.05; AJ Ashworth, ‘United Kingdom’ in KJ Heller and MK Dubber, The Handbook of Comparative Criminal Law (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010) 531–62, 547. 83 Law Reform Commission (Ireland), Report on Homicide , above (n 82) 26, para 2.05. 84 See Law Reform Commission (Ireland), Consultation Paper on Homicide: The Mental Element in Murder (LRC CP 17-2001) ch 4, 43–74; Law Reform Commission (Ireland), Report on Homicide , above (n 82) ch 3, 51–74, para 3.78. Mens Rea in Common Law Jurisdictions 44 Irish Courts recognise two forms of intent, namely, direct intent and oblique intent. 85 As for direct intent, two authoritative judgments can assist in clarifying its meaning. The first reported case to discuss the meaning of intention was People v Murray (1977).
eBook - PDF- Raneta Mack(Author)
- 1999(Publication Date)
- Greenwood(Publisher)
Critics of assisted suicide argue that vulnerable populations such as the elderly, the mentally ill or the poor might be attracted to such radical and extreme solutions in lieu of seeking other practical or therapeutic alternatives. Thus, the practice of assisted suicide could eventually be widely used by and against certain “undesirable” and “burdensome” populations. For this reason, opponents of assisted suicide contend that defining this conduct as murder and thereby increasing the potential for murder charges and convictions in these cases would necessarily enhance deterrence and prevent this potential abuse. Murder and Voluntary Manslaughter The distinguishing factor between murder and manslaughter is the concept of malice aforethought. Murder is an unlawful killing with malice aforethought, while manslaughter is defined as an unlawful killing without malice aforethought. As discussed earlier in the chapter, there are two species of manslaughter: voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter involves intentional conduct and, in many instances, closely resembles the conduct necessary for intentional murder. That is, the defendant intentionally commits an unlawful killing. However, in cases of voluntary manslaughter, depending upon the factual circumstances, the defendant will not Page 59 be guilty of the greater crime of murder because the criminal law recognizes that human beings may occasionally be driven to act ‘‘in the heat of passion.” As explored in this chapter, these special circumstances are fairly limited and the defendant’s conduct must be reasonable under the circumstances. Because of the fine line between intentional murder and voluntary manslaughter, juries deciding these cases are usually presented with difficult choices and some very novel defense theories. On August 20, 1989, Lyle and Erik Menendez brutally shot their parents to death in the family’s mansion in Beverly Hills.
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
