Negligence Manslaughter - Essay Example

? Criminal Law: Negligence Manslaughter Criminal Law: Negligence Manslaughter This is one of the major bodies of law. Itdeals with crimes committed against human or public authority. The law is different from civil law, which deals with crimes between individuals. Murder is an ideal example of a case under criminal law as it is a crime that affects the interest of the public. The laws ensure that there is equality among individuals and the public in general. It prevents the public from negligence, thus facilitating responsibility. Criminal law is distinctive for uniquely serious potential sanctions and consequences for failure to respect its provisions and rules. All crimes have criminal elements, but the difference comes in when one evaluate the magnitude of each crime. An ideal example is capital punishment, which entail the jurisdiction of the most serious crimes. Some criminal offences lead to corporal punishment, and the resultant punishment is whipping or caning. However, many nations discourage such punishments and have made them illegal as a result of irresponsible use of the punishment (Fletcher, 1998). Discussion of the criminal issues Initially, it is illegal to deliver at home without any medical attention. This I because the culprit may be risking the life of the new born as well as her own life. Accidents do occur during delivery, thus calling for specialized attention. From the case, it is evident that the party ignored the guideline under the public health act. The amendment of the act was to reduce the number of reported deaths and delivery complications. It is abundantly common for pregnant mothers to experience fatal conditions, as a result of low blood levels, after delivering. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the attendants to conduct immediate blood transfusion to save the life of the mother. Other reason leading to the amendment of the law is to help women in bringing up the child. This is both using finances and advisees. When a woman delivers, and she has no adequate capability to bring up the child in a sufficient way, the government adopts the child till when the mother has the capability. At other times it up to when the child gets to majority age. However, Paul and Marlene feared losing their child. This was against the provisions of the constitution, in reference to public health (Gorr And Sterling 1999). It also a crime to neglect medical services of a result of the fear of the unknown; this means that it is an obligation to report to any public hospital in case of ailments. After evaluation of this case, it is agreeable that, it is a case under manslaughter. This is because Paul had no intensions to kill but ended up killing his wife. However, it is under negligence manslaughter where the defendant fails to attend to a singularly serious duty leading to death of another. In this condition, Paul did not fail to attend to his duty because of commitments, as that would be a defense raise on against his judgment; it was all as a result of fear of losing the child because of financial instability. From the scenario, it is evident that Paul has two cases to answer. The first case is going against the provisions of the Public health act, while the other is negligence manslaughter (Harwood, 2000). Manslaughter This is a crime that is clear and is, therefore, not considered a murder of less degree. There is a vast difference between murder and manslaughter. In murder, there must be the presence of malice while not present in a manslaughter case. Murder can be seen as a more serious case than Manslaughter, but it is not an excusable or justifiable killing to which punishment should be imposed (Fletcher, 1998). Under the common law and also current statutes, the case in question is either involuntary or voluntary manslaughter. The difference between this two is that, in voluntary manslaughter, there must be some serious body harm and also an intention to kill. While, in the case of involuntary manslaughter, these cases are not present. Murderer has elements such as deliberation and premeditation which are not present in manslaughter. Some of the uses of adjectives should be left out by states which used to describe the different types of offenses. Now the offences can be placed into different varying degrees (Gross, 2005). Involuntary Manslaughter This refers to the unlawful killing of human beings without the presence of intent. The element of intent if absent is what makes the essential contrast between involuntary and voluntary manslaughter. In most of the states, manslaughter which happens to be involuntary results from the improper usage of skill or unreasonable care in the presence of an unlawful act or a lawful act which, does not amount to a felony (Gorr And Sterling 1999). In general involuntary manslaughter can be divided into two; (1) there is the criminal- negligence manslaughter, and there is (2) unlawful act manslaughter. Criminal negligence occurs when there is recklessness or an exceptionally high degree of negligence which results to death. On the other hand, unlawful act occurs when the one who attempts to commit or commits (misdemeanour) an unlawful act which results to death. Although involuntary manslaughter can be punished by all jurisdictions, somehow the statutes vary. In some of the states, criminal negligence can usually be described to be an extremely gross negligence or also culpable negligence. To others the manslaughter offence can be divided into degrees and voluntary manslaughter having a heavier penalty since it is a more serious offence than that of involuntary manslaughter (Harwood, 2000). Most of the statutes do not define offenses vaguely according to the common-law terms. However, there are a small number of statutes that can be considered modern that seem to be more specific. Under an example of one of these statues, the offense can be termed as the commission without proper requisite, skill or proper caution of a lawful act in which one has undesigned kills or unguardedly a human being or an unlawful act under a commission which tends not to be felonious or has an intention to inflict substantial body harm (Gross, 2005). Criminally negligent manslaughter is a homicide that results from taking high degree risks that usually is unreasonable. This can be put to be under manslaughter that is criminally negligent. Jurisdictions can be divided on whether one is knowledgeable on the risks involved. Modern codes of criminals require some risk of consciousness, but under other codes, if the element is absent it makes the offence a lesser homicide case. Criminally negligent manslaughter can be constituted by numerous cases through failure to perform a certain duty, or an omission to act at the right time. Duties are extremely essential, since laws do not consider that ordinary citizens have a duty to assist or rescue others, who happen to be in distress and thus allowing death due to failure of acting hence seen as manslaughter. Murder is likely to happen when the omission would be intentional, and death is substantially or likely to happen and thus an offence of murder. When there is recklessness, negligence is present and intent to kill is evident, then no offense should be committed (Fletcher, 1998). Death as a result of operations of a vehicle in the criminally negligent manner and charged as an offence; that is separate. It can be seen as a lesser severe crime than that of involuntary manslaughter. Criminal negligence, which can be considered an element, is not all of the same degree as that negligence required in involuntary manslaughter. An example, some homicidal vehicular statues, are such that they do not require ordinary negligence only while, on most jurisdictions, there is the requirement of a large degree of negligence for the case of involuntary manslaughter (Gorr And Sterling 1999). Limitation Criminal negligence is not to be at all confused at tort with criminal negligence. This is at the common law level. It requires a higher standard of proof to those who want to prove it which can be considered as the crown, indicated by LCJ Hewart in R v Bateman: The test followed in Andrew’s v DPP for criminal negligence by House of Lords. In Australia, it followed by the criminal appeal court of Queensland. Also, the high court in R v Callaghan and also Evgeniou v R. Negligence at tort happens to look at the conduct of the defendant in comparison to reasonable care standards. In Birmingham Blyth v Waterworks Co, B Alderson described this as the omission for a reasonable man to do something. Under the guidance, of those considerations which regulate human affairs conduct, to do something or would do, which happens to be prudent and thus a reasonable human being would not take (Gorr And Sterling 1999). Legislative provisions used to impose criminal liability in reference to negligence can be set out in Western Australia. A duty can be rendered to a person to partake, which if not undertaken and it results to death or injury of a person under their control. This is to say in other words that the standards for the provision of the necessities that life requires may not be too high, but if they are to breached in any way, then the person who happens to be breaching them should be accused and charged under criminal negligence provision (Gross, 2005). There are essentially two duties of the code. The first is that a human being should be imposed towards a duty in which they are to act, which if not undertaken may result to death or an injury of another human being under their control. The second one is that a human being has to have control over any harmful thing that surrounds him or her, or par-take an act so as not to harm or kill any person or human being. Legal Advice Defenses to negligence manslaughter This sector of law under manslaughter depends on two charges. This is where the defendant caused death because he neglected his responsibilities. One of the possible defenses is stating that the case amounted to gross or crime. This is by arguing that, the victim was also ignorant; however. It is true that the victim was also negligent in one way or the other. It was Marlene’s idea to avoid delivering in a hospital because she feared losing her baby. There is also some negligent on both the dead and the defendant because they went on having a baby without any legal document bidding the two individuals. This would have made the case simpler as it is Paul’s obvious responsibility to take Marlene in hospital under all circumstances. However, this is also not a satisfactory defense in manslaughter (Gross, 2005). We can also argue the case basing the argument on misdemeanor manslaughter. This is because, according to law; any defense under misdemeanor is also a defense in negligence manslaughter. These defenses are self-defense to assault, among others. However, the argument on the case between Paul and Marlene has no basis on self-defense. The action was as a result of runn9ng away from the hand of law. From this argument, it is reasonable to say that there are defenses under such criminal acts (Gorr And Sterling 1999). Sentencing negligence manslaughter This is a task requiring evaluation of different parameters. An evaluation must be conducted to analyze whether federal or state sentencing applies. If this is a conviction under a federal court, sentencing can be between one to six years in reference to judge’s discretion. On the other hand, if the case is under a state court, guidelines vary in relation to the court and judgment may vary depending on the severity of the case. However, the judge weighs the severity. This is whether it is of low severity, middle severity, or high severity sentence; the defendant's sentence is in relation to the level of severity (Gross, 2005). In other cases, states designate negligence manslaughter into subsections of felony; they later assign the sentence in reference to the class. In reference to states court such as New York, negligence manslaughter calls for 5-4 years of the sentence. Other cases under involuntary manslaughter, where death is as a result of recklessness, sentence is over nine years. In the case of Paul, it is case under recklessness, meaning that, under a state court, his sentence would be over 9 years (Fletcher, 1998). Consequences of conviction for negligence manslaughter The criminal act and sentence period will enter in ones criminal records. Almost all states in USA prohibit anyone convicted on manslaughter against possessing or owning a gun. Ex-convicts of manslaughter have difficulties in employment. This is because they proved to be irresponsible in one way or the other. The convicts also have limited access to different licenses, because of their criminal records. Manslaughter is a serious crime, but lawyers can always help in reducing the charges of the crime (Gross, 2005). References Fletcher, G. P., 1998. Basic Concepts of Criminal Law. Oxford University Press. Gorr, M. And Sterling H. 1992. Controversies in Criminal Law. Westview Press. Gross, H. 2005. A Theory of Criminal Justice. Oxford University Press. Gross, H., 2005. A Theory of Criminal Justice. Oxford University Press. Harwood, S. 2000. "Is Mercy Inherently Unjust?” Crime and Punishment: Philosophic Explorations. Wadsworth Publishing Co. Read More