Editing Murder (section)

===Mitigating circumstances===
Some countries allow conditions that "affect the balance of the mind" to be regarded as [[mitigating factor|mitigating circumstances]]. This means that a person may be found guilty of "manslaughter" on the basis of "diminished responsibility" rather than being found guilty of murder, if it can be proved that the killer was suffering from a condition that affected their judgment at the time. [[clinical depression|Depression]], [[post-traumatic stress disorder]] and medication [[adverse effect (medicine)|side-effects]] are examples of conditions that may be taken into account when assessing responsibility.

====Insanity====
{{main|Insanity defense|M'Naghten rules}}
[[Mental Disorder (Insanity) Defense|Mental disorder]] may apply to a wide range of disorders including [[psychosis]] caused by [[schizophrenia]] and [[dementia]], and excuse the person from the need to undergo the stress of a trial as to liability. Usually, [[antisocial personality disorder|sociopathy]] and other [[personality disorders]] are not legally considered insanity. In some jurisdictions, following the pre-trial hearing to determine the extent of the disorder, the defense of "not guilty by reason of insanity" may be used to get a not guilty verdict.<ref>''M'Naughten's case'', [1843] All ER Rep 229.</ref> This defense has two elements:

* That the [[defendant]] had a serious mental illness, disease, or defect
* That the defendant's mental condition, at the time of the killing, rendered the perpetrator unable to determine right from wrong, or that what they were doing was wrong
[[File:CCTV 1 of Aaron Alexis in building 197.jpg|thumb|[[Aaron Alexis]] holding a shotgun during his rampage]]

Under [[New York (state)|New York]] law, for example:
{{blockquote|§ 40.15 Mental disease or defect. In any prosecution for an offense, it is an affirmative defence that when the defendant engaged in the proscribed conduct, he lacked criminal responsibility by reason of mental disease or defect. Such lack of criminal responsibility means that at the time of such conduct, as a result of mental disease or defect, he lacked substantial capacity to know or appreciate either: 1. The nature and consequences of such conduct; or 2. That such conduct was wrong.|[[N.Y. Penal Law]], § 40.15<ref>N.Y. Penal Law, § 40.15, found at [http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LAWSSEAF.cgi?QUERYTYPE=LAWS+&QUERYDATA=$$PEN40.15$$@TXPEN040.15+&LIST=LAW+&BROWSER=EXPLORER+&TOKEN=14676554+&TARGET=VIEW N.Y. Assembly web site], retrieved 2014-04-10.</ref>}}

Under the [[French Penal Code of 1791|French Penal Code]]:
{{blockquote |Article 122-1
* A person is not criminally liable who, when the act was committed, was suffering from a psychological or neuropsychological disorder which destroyed his discernment or his ability to control his actions.
* A person who, at the time he acted, was suffering from a psychological or neuropsychological disorder which reduced his discernment or impeded his ability to control his actions, remains punishable; however, the court shall take this into account when it decides the penalty and determines its regime. |source=Penal Code §122-1 found at [http://195.83.177.9/code/liste.phtml?lang=uk&c=33&r=3627 Legifrance web site]}}

Those who successfully argue a defense based on a mental disorder are usually referred to mandatory clinical treatment until they are certified safe to be released back into the community, rather than prison.<ref name="french civil law on mental health">{{cite web |url=http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006072665&idArticle=LEGIARTI000006687933&dateTexte=20080929 |title=Code de la Santé Publique Chapitre III: Hospitalisation d'office Article L3213-1 |access-date=2007-10-23 |publisher=Legifrance |year=2002 |language=fr |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081021032011/http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006072665&idArticle=LEGIARTI000006687933&dateTexte=20080929 |archive-date=2008-10-21 }}, note: this text refers to the procedure of [[involuntary commitment]] by the demand of the public authority, but the prefect systematically use that procedure whenever a man is discharged due to his dementia.</ref>

====Postpartum depression====
[[Postpartum depression]] (also known as post-natal depression) is recognized in some countries as a mitigating factor in cases of [[infanticide]]. According to  Susan Friedman, "Two dozen nations have infanticide laws that decrease the penalty for mothers who kill their children of up to one year of age. The United States does not have such a law, but mentally ill mothers may plead not guilty by reason of insanity."<ref>Friedman, SH. "Commentary: Postpartum Psychosis, Infanticide, and Insanity Implications for Forensic Psychiatry", J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 40:3:326-332 (September 2012).</ref> In the [[law of the Republic of Ireland]], infanticide was made a separate crime from murder in 1949, applicable for the mother of a baby under one year old where "the balance of her mind was disturbed by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to the child or by reason of the effect of lactation consequent upon the birth of the child".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1949/act/16/section/1/enacted/en/html#sec1 |title=Infanticide Act, 1949, Section 1 |website=[[Irish Statute Book]] |access-date=22 May 2016 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160601084439/http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1949/act/16/section/1/enacted/en/html#sec1 |archive-date=1 June 2016 }}</ref> Since independence, death sentences for murder in such cases had always been [[commutation of sentence|commuted]];<ref name="Rattigan2008">{{cite journal |last1=Rattigan |first1=Clíona |title='Done to death by father or relatives': Irish families and infanticide cases, 1922–1950 |journal=The History of the Family |date=January 2008 |volume=13 |issue=4 |pages=370–383 |doi=10.1016/j.hisfam.2008.09.003 |s2cid=144571256  | issn = 1081-602X }}</ref> the new act was intended "to eliminate all the terrible ritual of the [[black cap]] and the solemn words of the judge pronouncing sentence of death in those cases ... where it is clear to the Court and to everybody, except perhaps the unfortunate accused, that the sentence will never be carried out."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/takes/seanad1949070700007 |title=Infanticide Bill, 1949—Second and Subsequent Stages |website=Seanad Éireann debates |pages=Vol.36 c.1472 |no-pp=y|date=7 July 1949 |access-date=22 May 2016 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160701225250/http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/takes/seanad1949070700007 |archive-date=1 July 2016 }}</ref> In Russia, murder of a newborn child by the mother has been a separate crime since 1996.<ref>[[Criminal Code of Russia]], art.106</ref>

====Unintentional====
For a killing to be considered murder in nine out of fifty states in the US, there normally needs to be an element of intent. A defendant may argue that they took precautions not to kill, that the death could not have been anticipated, or was unavoidable. As a general rule, [[manslaughter]]<ref name="manslaughter in France">{{cite web|url=http://195.83.177.9/code/liste.phtml?lang=uk&c=33&r=3691|title=Article 222-8|access-date=2007-11-01|publisher=Legifrance|author=The French Parliament|website=French Criminal Law|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071102221056/http://195.83.177.9/code/liste.phtml?lang=uk&c=33&r=3691|archive-date=2007-11-02}}</ref> constitutes [[recklessness (law)|reckless]] killing, but manslaughter also includes criminally negligent (i.e. grossly negligent) homicide.<ref name="invol offences">{{cite web|url=http://195.83.177.9/code/liste.phtml?lang=uk&c=33&r=3686|title=Section II – Involuntary Offences Against Life|access-date=2007-11-01|publisher=Legifrance|author=The French Parliament|website=French Criminal Law|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071102221040/http://195.83.177.9/code/liste.phtml?lang=uk&c=33&r=3686|archive-date=2007-11-02}}</ref>  Unintentional killing that results from an involuntary action generally cannot constitute murder.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Michaels|first1=Alan C.|title=Defining Unintended Murder|journal=Columbia Law Review|volume=85|issue=4|pages=786–811|jstor=1122334|year=1985|doi=10.2307/1122334}}</ref> After examining the evidence, a judge or jury (depending on the jurisdiction) would determine whether the killing was intentional or unintentional.

====Diminished capacity====
In jurisdictions using the Uniform Penal Code, such as California, [[diminished capacity]] may be a defense. For example, [[Dan White]] used this defense<ref>The so-called "[[Twinkie defense]]").</ref> to obtain a manslaughter conviction, instead of murder, in the [[Moscone–Milk assassinations|assassination]] of Mayor [[George Moscone]] and Supervisor [[Harvey Milk]]. Afterward, California amended its penal code to provide "As a matter of public policy there shall be no defense of diminished capacity, diminished responsibility, or irresistible impulse in a criminal action...."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2011/pen/part-1/25-29/28/|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20180425183608/https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2011/pen/part-1/25-29/28/|url-status=dead|title=2011 California Code :: Penal Code :: PART 1. OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS [25 - 680] :: TITLE 1. OF PERSONS LIABLE TO PUNISHMENT FOR CRIME :: Section 28|archivedate=April 25, 2018|website=Justia Law}}</ref>