Online Encyclopedia
Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
HOMICIDE (Lat. homicidium)
Online EncyclopediaEncyclopedia Home :: HIG-HOR
del.icio.us it!
|
See also:HOMICIDE (See also:Lat. homicidium) , the See also:general and neutral See also:term for the killing of one human being by another. The nature of the responsibility of the slayer to the See also:state and to the relatives of the slain has been one of the See also:chief concerns of all systems of See also:law from the earliest times, and it has been variously considered from the points of view of the sanctity of human See also:life, the interests of the See also:sovereign, the injury to the See also:family of the slain and the moral See also:guilt, i.e. the motives and intentions, of the slayer. The earliest recorded See also:laws (those of Khammurabi) do not contain any sweeping general See also:provision as tto the See also:punishment of homicide. The See also:death See also:penalty is freely imposed but not for homicide. " If a See also:man strike a See also:gentleman's daughter that she See also:dies, his own daughter is to be put to death, if a poor man's the slayer pays See also:mina." In the See also:Mosaic law the general command " See also:Thou shalt not kill " of the See also:Decalogue is in terms See also:absolute. In See also:primitive law homicide, however See also:innocent, subjected the slayer to the lawful vengeance of the kindred of the slain, unless he could make some See also:composition with him. This lex talionis (a life for a life) resulted: (I) in a course of private See also:justice which still survives in the See also:vendetta of See also:Corsica and See also:Albania, and the See also:blood feuds arising out of " difficulties " in the See also:southern and western parts of the See also:United States; (2) in the recognition of sanctuaries and cities of See also:refuge within which the avenger of blood might not penetrate to kill an innocent manslayer; and (3) in the See also:system of wite, bote and wer, by which the life of every man had its assessed See also:price payable to his chief and his next of See also:kin. It took See also:long to induce the relatives of the slain to appreciate anything beyond the fact of the death of their kinsman or to discriminate between intentional and accidental homicide. By the laws of Khammurabi (206, 208) striking a man in a See also:quarrel without deadly See also:intent but with fatal effect was treated as a See also:matter for See also:compensation according to the See also:rank of the slain. The See also:Pentateuch discriminates between the man " who lieth in wait for" or "cometh presumptuously" on "his See also:neighbour to slay him with guile " (See also:Exodus xxi. 13, 14), and the man "who killeth his neighbour ignorantly whom he hated not in See also:time past " (I)eut. xix. 4). But even killing by misadventure exposed the slayer to the avenger of blood. " As a man goeth into the See also:wood with his neighbour to hew wood, and his See also:hand fetcheth a stroke with the See also:axe to cut down a See also:tree and the See also:head slippeth from the helve and lighteth upon his neighbour that he See also:die: he shall flee into one of these cities (of refuge) and live " (Dent. xix. 5).
Under the See also:early laws of See also:Teutonic and See also:Celtic communities the inconveniences of the blood See also:feud were gradually mitigated (see CRIMINAL LAW) by the system of wite and wer (or See also:eric),
but the blood feud continued long in See also:Friesland and See also:Lower See also:Saxony, and in parts of See also:Switzerland until the s6th See also:century. In See also:England under the See also:Norman system homicide became a plea of the See also:crown, and the rights of the kindred to private vengeance and to compensation were gradually superseded in favour of the right of the See also: But it was not until 1828 that the innocence of excusable homicide was expressly declared. The See also:rule is now expressed in s. 7 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861: " No punishment or forfeiture shall be incurred by any person who shall kill another by misfortune, or in his own defence, or in any other manner without felony."
The further differentiation between different degrees of criminal homicide was marked by legislation of See also: An intent, preceding the act, to kill or do grievous bodily harm to the person or to any other person :
2. Knowledge that the act done is likely to produce such consequences, whether coupled with an intention to produce them or not:
3. An intent to commit any felony: or
4. An intent to resist an officer of See also:police in the See also:execution of his See also:duty.
See Select Pleas of Crown, I (See also:Selden Society Publ.) ; See also:Pollock and See also:Maitland, Mist. Eng. Law, ii. 458, 476, 478. II
papers exhibiting profound learning (Uber die Heimat, 1852 ;
Genealogie der Handschriften See also:des Sachsenspiegels, 1859 ; Die
Stadtbucher des Mittelalters, 186o; Der Dreissigste, 1864, &c.).
The third See also:form of malice aforethought has been much controverted. When it was first recognized as creating a liability for wilful murder almost all felonies were See also:capital offences: but even at the end of the 17th century See also:Lord See also:Holt expressed a view that it should be limited to felonies involving violence or danger to life, e.g. See also:assault with intent to rob, or setting See also:fire to a dwelling-See also:house. And See also:Sir See also: Starting with the definition above given, English law still retains so much of its See also:medieval See also:character as to presume all homicide to be " malicious, and therefore murder, unless it is either justified by the command or permission of the law, excused on the ground of See also:accident or self-preservation, or alleviated into manslaughter by being the involuntary consequence of some act not strictly lawful or occasioned by some sudden and sufficiently violent provocation." The truth of the facts alleged in See also:justification, excuse or alleviation, is for the See also:jury to determine: the question whether if true they support the plea for which they are put forward is for the See also:court. In the See also:administration of the English criminal law as to homicide the consequences of too strict an,adherence to the technical See also:definitions of the offences are avoided (a) by the exercise of the jury of their See also:powers to convict of manslaughter only even in cases where they are directed that the offence is murder or nothing; (b) by the See also:report of the See also:judge as to the particular circumstances of each case in which a conviction of murder has been followed by the statutory See also:sentence of death; (c) by the examination of all the See also:evidence in the case by the See also:Home See also:Office in See also:order to enable the secretary of state to determine whether the See also:prerogative of See also:mercy should be exercised. Homicide is justifiable and not criminal when the killing is done in the execution of the law. The most important case of justifiable homicide is the execution of a criminal in due course of public justice. This See also:condition is most stringently interpreted. " To kill the greatest of malefactors deliberately, uncompelled, and extrajudicially is murder.... And further, if See also:judgment of death be given by a judge not authorized by lawful See also:commission, and execution is done accordingly, the judge is guilty of murder " (Stephen's Commentaries, See also:book vi. c. iv.). The execution must be carried out by the proper officer or his See also:deputy: any person executing the sentence without such authority, were it the judge himself, would be guilty of murder. And the sentence must be strictly pursued: to execute a criminal by a See also:kind of death other than that to which he has been judicially condemned is murder. Homicide committed by an officer of justice in the course of carrying out his duty, as such, is also justifiable; e.g. where a felon resists a legal See also:arrest and is killed in the effort to arrest him (see 2 Pollock and Maitland, 476) ; where See also:officers in dispersing a riotous assemblage kill any of the See also:mob, &c. (see See also:RioT). In these cases the homicide must be shown to have been absolutely necessary. Again, homicide is justifiable if committed in the defence of person or See also:property against forcible and heinous crime, such as murder, violent See also:robbery, See also:rape or See also:burglary. In this connexion there has been much discussion as to whether the person attacked is under a duty to See also:retreat: and in substance the justification depends on the continuous See also:necessity of attack or defence in order to prevent the commission by the deceased of the crime threatened. Homicide is excusable and not criminal at all when committed either by misadventure or in self-defence. In the former case the homicide is excused; where a man in the course of doing some lawful See also:work, accidentally and without intention kills another, e.g. See also:shooting at a See also:mark and undesignedly hitting and killing a man. The act must be strictly lawful, and death by misadventure in unlawful See also:sports is not a case of excusable homicide. Homicide in self-defence is excusable when the slayer is himself in immediate danger of death, and has done all he could to avoid the assault. Accordingly, if he strikes and kills his assailant after the assault is over, this is not excusable homicide. But if the assault has been premeditated, as in the case of a See also:duel, the death of either HOMICIDE antagonist has under English law always been held to be murder and not excusable homicide. The excuse of self-defence covers the case in which a person in defence of others whom it is his duty to protect—See also:children, wife, See also:master, &c.—kills an assailant. It has been considered doubtful whether the plea of self-defence is available to one who has himself provoked a fray, in the course of which he is so pressed by his antagonist that his only resource is to kill him. In English law the term " manslaughter " is applied to those forms of homicide which though neither justifiable nor excusable are attended by alleviating circumstances which bring them See also:short of wilful murder. The offence is not defined by See also:statute, but only by judicial rulings. Its punishment is as a maximum penal See also:servitude for life, and as a minimum a fine or recognizances to be of See also:good behaviour. The quantum of punishment between the limits above stated is in the discretion of the court, and not, as under See also:continental codes, with fixed minima; and the offence includes acts and omissions of very varying gravity, from acts which only by the charitable appreciation of a jury fall short of wilful murder, to acts or omissions which can only technically be described as criminal, e.g. where one of two persons engaged in poaching, by pure accident gets caught in a hedge so that his See also:gun goes off and kills his See also:fellow-poacher. This may be described as an extreme instance of " constructive crime." There are two See also:main forms of " manslaughter ": 1. " Voluntary " homicide under See also:grave and sudden provocation or on a sudden quarrel in the See also:heat of See also:passion, without the slayer taking undue See also:advantage or acting in an unusual manner. The substance of the alleviation of guilt lies in the See also:absence of time for cool reflection or the formation of a premeditated See also:design to kill. Under English law the provocation must be by acts and not by words or gestures, and must be serious and not trivial, and the killing must be immediately after provocation and while the slayer has lost his self-See also:control in consequence of the provocation. The provocation need not be by assault or violence, and perhaps the best-recognized example is the slaying by a See also:husband of a man found committing See also:adultery with the slayer's wife. In the case of a sudden quarrel it does not matter who began or provoked the quarrel. This used to be called " See also:chance medley." 2. " Involuntary " homicide as a result of See also:great rashness or See also:gross See also:negligence in respect of matters involving danger to human life, e.g. in See also:driving trains or vehicles, or in dealing with dangerous weapons, or in performing surgical operations, or in taking care of the helpless. The innumerable modes in which criminal liability for killing others has been adjudged under the English definitions of murder and manslaughter cannot be here stated, and can only be studied by reference to the judicial decisions collected and discussed in See also:Russell on Crimes and other English See also:text-books, and in the valuable work by Mr J. ID. See also:Mayne on the criminal law of See also:India, in which the English common law rulings are stated See also:side by side with the terms and interpretations of the See also:Indian penal code. Much labour has been expended by many jurists in efforts to create a scientific and acceptable See also:classification of the various forms of unlawful homicide which shall properly define the cases which should be punishable by law and the appropriate punishment. Their efforts have resulted in the See also:establishment in almost every state except the United See also:Kingdom of statutory definitions of the crime, beginning with the See also:French penal code and going down to the criminal code of See also:Japan. In the case of England, as a result of the labours of Sir James' Stephen, a code See also:bill was submitted to parliament in 1878. In 1879 a draft code was prepared by See also:Blackburn, Lush and See also:Barry, and was presented to parliament. It was founded on and prepared with Sir J. Stephen, and is a revision of his See also:digest of the criminal law. After defining homicide and culpable homicide, the draft code (cl. 174) declares culpable homicide to be murder in the following cases: (a) if the offender means to cause the death of the person killed; (b) if the offender means to cause to the person killed any bodily injury which is known to the offender to be likely to cause death, and if the offender, whether he does or does not mean to cause death, is reckless whether death ensues or not; (c) if the offender means to cause death or such bodily injury as aforesaid to one person, so that if that person be killed the offender would be guilty of murder, and by accident or See also:mistake the offender kills another person though he does not mean to hurt the person killed; (d) if the offender for any unlawful See also:object does an act which he knows or ought to have known to be likely to cause death, and thereby kills any person, though he may have desired that his object should be effected without hurting any one. Further (el. 175), it is murder (whether the offender means or not death to ensue, or knows or not that death is likely to ensue) in the following cases:—" (a) if he means to inflict grievous bodily injury for the purpose of facilitating the commission of any of the offences hereinafter mentioned, or the See also:flight of the offender upon the commission or attempted commission thereof, and death ensues from his violence; (b) if he administers any stupefying thing for either of the purposes aforesaid and death ensues from the effects thereof; (c) if he by any means wilfully stops the breath of any person for either of the purposes aforesaid and death ensues from such stopping of the breath." The following are the offences referred to:---" high See also:treason and other offences against the king's authority, piracy and offences deemed to be piracy, See also:escape or See also:rescue from See also:prison or lawful custody, resisting lawful See also:apprehension, murder, rape, forcible See also:abduction, robbery, burglary, See also:arson." Cl. 176 reduces culpable homicide to manslaughter if the person who causes death does so " in the heat of passion caused by sudden provocation "; and " any wrongful act or insult of such a nature as to be sufficient to deprive any See also:ordinary person of the See also:power of self-control may be provocation if the offender acts upon it on the sudden, and before there has been time for his passion to cool. Whether any particular wrongful act or insult amounts to provocation and whether the offender was deprived of self-control shall be questions of fact; but no one shall be deemed to give provocation by doing that which he had a legal right to do, or which the offender incited him to do in order to provide an excuse for killing him or doing grievous bodily harm to any person." Further, " an arrest shall not necessarily reduce the offence from murder to manslaughter because an arrest was illegal, but if the illegality was known to the offender it may be evidence of provocation "; (el. 177) " culpable homicide not amounting to murder is manslaughter."
The definitions embodied in these clauses though not yet accepted by the See also:British legislature, have in substance been embodied in the criminal codes of See also:Canada (18g2 ss. 227-230), New See also:Zealand (1893, ss. 163-166), See also:Queensland (x899, ss. 300-305), and Western See also:Australia (Igor, ss. 275-280).
From the point of view of See also:civil as distinct from criminal responsibility homicide does not by the common law give any cause of See also:action against the person causing the death of another in favour of the wife or blood relations of the deceased. In early law this was otherwise; and the wer or eric of the deceased came historically before the right of chief or state. But under English law the rights of relations, except by way of See also:appeal for felony,' were swept aside in favour of the crown, on the principle that every homicide is presumed felonious (murder) unless the contrary is proved, and that in all cases of homicide not justifiable by law a forfeiture was incurred. The .rights of the relatives were also defeated by application of the See also:maxim " actio personalis moritur cunt persona " (" a See also:personal action dies with the person ") to all proceedings for injury to the person or to reputation. In See also:Scotland the old theory was preserved in the law as to assythement.
In England the law was altered at the instance of Lord See also: 93) so as to give a right of a claim by the husband, wife, See also:parent or See also:child of a person killed by a wrongful (or even criminal) act, neglect or See also:default by another which would have given the deceased if he had sur- f Appeals remained in the law till 1819, but were long before this disused. In the See also:middle ages they were used as a means of getting compensation.vived a cause of action against the wrongdoer. The compensation payable is what the surviving relative has lost by the death, and under the Workmen's Compensation Act igo6 (in all cases to which it applies) the employer is liable even without negligence to compensate the dependants of an employee killed by an accident arising out of and in the course of the employment; and in such cases even if the death was due to serious and wilful misconduct by the employee, compensation is payable. In the Indian penal code the definitions of murder are so See also:drawn as to limit the offences to cases where it was actually intended to cause death or bodily injury by the acts or omissions of the slayer, and the definition of culpable homicide short of murder is so drawn as to exclude the forms of unintentional manslaughter due to neglect of duty, e.g. in the conduct of trains or See also:ships or vehicles. This last omission was supplied in 1870. The Indian code does not treat as murder either duelling or helping See also:Hindu widows to commit See also:suttee (s. 301, exception 5). In most of the British possessions in See also:Asia and in See also:east See also:Africa the Indian definitions of homicide have been adopted. In the See also:rest of the colonies, except See also:South Africa, the law of homicide depends on the English common law as modified by colonial codes or statutes. In South Africa it rests mainly on the See also:Roman Dutch law. See also:Europe.—In See also:European codes distinctions corresponding to those of the English law are drawn between premeditated and other forms of criminal homicide; but more elaborate distinctions are drawn between the degrees of deliberation or criminality manifested in the slaying, and the minimum or maximum penalty is varied accordingly. In the French penal code voluntary homicide is called murder (meurtre, See also:art. 295): but if committed with premeditation or lying in wait is styled assassinat (guet-apens) (296-298). Poisoning (even if the See also:poison is not fatal), is specially punished, as is See also:parricide (on the lines of the obsolete English offence of See also:petty treason), and See also:infanticide, i.e. the killing of newly-See also:born infants. Assassination, poisoning and parricide are at present capital offences; but a bill to abolish the death sentence has been laid before the French parliament. The See also:German code distinguishes between voluntary homicide which is done with deliberation and such homicide committed without deliberation (ss. 211, 212), and provides for mitigation of punishment where the slaying was provoked without See also:fault in the slayer by any wrongful act or serious insult upon the slayer or his relatives by the slain (213). Parricide and infanticide are specially punished (214, 215), as is killing another person at his express and See also:earnest See also:request (216)—an offence which would in England be murder—and it is a See also:separate offence to cause the death of another, the penalty being increased if the offender was peculiarly See also:bound by office, calling or See also:trade to use a care which he did not use (222). The See also:Italian code punishes as homicide those who with intention to kill cause the death of another (364). The death penalty is not imposed, but scales of punishment are provided to See also:deal with aggravated forms of the offence. Thus ergastolo (penal servitude for life) is the punishment in the case of homicide of ascendants and descendants, or with premeditation, or under the See also:sole impulse of brutal ferocity or with gross See also:cruelty (gravi sevizie), or by means of arson, inundation, drowning and certain other crimes, or to secure the gains or conceal the commission, or to secure See also:immunity from the consequences, of another crime (366). Personal violence resulting in death inflicted witlibut intention to kill is punishable minore poend (368), and it is criminal to cause the death of another by imprudence, negligence or lack of skill in an art or profession (imperitia netla propria erte o professione), or by non-observance of regulations, orders or instructions. The See also:Spanish code has like those of See also:Italy and See also:France See also:special punishments for parricide (417) and for assassination, in which are included killing for See also:reward or promise of reward or by inundation (418), and for aiding another to commit suicide (421). Both the Italian and the Spanish codes afford a special mitigation See also:HOMILETICS-See also:HOMILY the See also:regular duty of the See also:bishop, but he could devolve it, if he thought See also:fit, on a See also:presbyter or See also:deacon, or even on a layman. An early and well-known insfance of such delegation is that mentioned by See also:Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. vi. 19) in the case of See also:Origen
(216 A.D.).2 In course of time the exposition of the See also:lesson for the See also:day came more frequently to assume a more elaborate character, and to pass into the See also:category of a Xlyos or even
4 ovocbia or r/siXoeOc ia; but when it did so the fact was as far as possible denoted by a See also:change of name, the word buXfa being reserved for the expository or exegetical lecture as distinguished from the See also:pulpit oration or See also:sermon.' While the See also: See also:Prior to See also:Charlemagne it is probable that several other collections of homilies had obtained considerable popularity, but in the time of that See also:emperor these had suffered so many mutilations and corruptions that an authoritative revision was felt to be imperatively necessary. The result was the well-known Homiliarium, prepared by See also:Paul Warnefrid, otherwise known as See also:Paulus Diaconus (q.v.).' It consists of 2 Sozomen (Hist. Eccl. vii. 19) mentions that in See also:Alexandria in his day the bishop alone was in the See also:custom of preaching; but this, he implies, was a very exceptional state of matters, dating only from the time of See also:Arius. 3 To the more strictly exegetical lectures the names EE7,yiteEis, Efny+tµara, EZ71y7rTLKa, EKBEO•ELS, were sometimes applied. But as no popular discourse delivered from the pulpit could ever be exclusively expository and as on the other hand every sermon professing to be based on Scripture required to be more or less " exegetical " and " textual," it would obviously be sometimes very hard to draw the See also:line of distinction between oµnXia and X6yos. It would be difficult to define very precisely the difference in French between a " See also:conference and a " sermon ' ; and the same difficulty seems to have been experienced in See also:Greek by See also:Photius, who says of the eloquent pulpit orations of See also:Chrysostom, that they were dµtXiai rather than Xbyci. ° See also:Manuscript copies are preserved at See also:Heidelberg, See also:Darmstadt, See also:Frankfort, See also:Giessen, See also:Cassel and other places. It was first printed at See also:Spires in 1482. In the Cologne edition of 1530 the See also:title runs—Homiliae seu mavis sermones sive conciones ad populum, praestantissimorum ecclesiae doctorum Hieronymi, See also:Augustine, Ambrosii, Gregorii, Origenis, Chrysostomi, Bedae, es'c., in See also:hunt ordinem digestae per Alchuinum levitam, idque injungente ei Carolo M. Rom. See also:Imp. cui a secretis fuit. Though thus attributed here to See also:Alcuin, who is known to have revised the Lectionary or Comes Hieronymi, the compilation to infanticide committed to avoid dishonour to the See also:mother of the See also:infant or her family. See also:America.—The most notable difference between England and the United States in,regard to the law on this subject is the recognition by state legislation of degrees in murder. English law treats all unlawful killing not reducible to manslaughter as of the same degree of guilt in law. See also:American statutes seek to discriminate for purposes of punishment between the graver and the less culpable forms of murder. Thus an act of the legislature of See also:Pennsylvania (22nd of See also:April 1794) declares " all murder which shall be perpetrated by means of poison or by lying in wait or by any other kind of wilful, deliberate and premeditated killing, or which shall be committed in the perpetration of or See also:attempt to perpetrate any arson, rape, robbery or burglary shall be deemed murder of the first degree; and all other kinds of murder shall be deemed murder of the second degree." This legislation has been copied or adopted in many if not most of the other states. There are also statutory degrees of manslaughter in the legislation of some of the states. The See also:differences of legislation, coupled with the power of the jury in some states to determine the sentence, and the limitations on the right of the judges to comment on the testimony adduced, See also:lead to very great differences between the administration of the law as to homicide in the two countries. Additional information and CommentsThere are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML. Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide. |
|
|
[back] HOMEYER, KARL GUSTAV (1795-1874) |
[next] HOMILETICS (Gr. oµi)Vrr oc6s, from O uXe1v, to ass... |