Replies

RETHINKING ABORTION Black's Law Dictionary ^
Posted on 6/28/2022, 4:54:19 PM by whitney69
[excerpt]
Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human creature without malice, either express or implied, and without any mixture of deliberation whatever; which may be voluntary, upon a sudden heat of passion, or involuntary, in the commission of an unlawful act, or a lawful act without due caution and circumspection. (Black’s Law Dictionary)
Murder two is the term for a homicide that is not associated with malice or any premeditation but is still from a result of causing harm. It is a more serious crime than manslaughter. (Black’s Law Dictionary)
Murder one term that is the describes the killing of a person that has been planned and carried out with malice. (Black’s Law Dictionary)

Attribution of the term human creature to Black's Law Dictionary is premeditated bullshit. Nobody vaguely familiar with Black's would believe that is what is in Black's Law Dictionary, any edition.

Manslaughter, Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed., 1990

The unjustifiable, inexcusable and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation and malice. State v. Bannister, Mo.App., 512 S.W.2d 843, 845. The unlawful killing of a human without malice, without any mixture of deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful without due caution and circumspection. Wallace by U.S., 162 U.S. 466, 16 S. Ct. 859, 40 L.Ed. 1039.

You appear to have chosen a common law definition of manslaughter, perhaps unknowingly and unintentionally. In any case, the term is not human creature but human being or living human being.

Citing Wallace v. United States, 162 U.S. 466 (1896)

In Wallace we find the Court at 476 was actually paraphrasing Sparf and Hansen v. United States, 156 U.S. 51 (1895).

Sparf v. United States, 156 U. S. 51. . . . Manslaughter at common law was defined to be the unlawful and felonious killing of another without any malice, either express or implied. Whart. Am. Or. L. (8th ed.) sec. 304. Whether there be what is termed express malice or only implied malice, the proof to show either is of the same nature, viz., the circumstances leading up to and surrounding the killing. The definition of the crime given by section 5341 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is substantially the same. The proof of homicide, as necessarily involving malice, must show the facts under which the killing was effected, and from the whole facts and circumstances surrounding the killing the jury infers malice or its absence. Malice in connection with the crime of killing is but another name for a certain condition of a man's heart or mind, and as no one can look into the heart or mind of another, the only way to decide upon its condition at the time of a killing is to infer it from the surrounding facts, and that inference is one of fact for a jury. The presence or absence of this malice or mental condition marks the, boundary which separates the two crimes of murder and manslaughter."

In Sparf and Hansen v. United States, 156 U.S. 51 (1895) at 59-60,

In its charge to the jury the court, among other things., said "What, then, is murder There are only two kinds of felonious homicide known to the laws of the United States. One is murder and the other is manslaughter. There are no degrees of murder." "There is no definition of murder by any United States statute. We resort to the common law for that. By the common law, murder is the unlawful killing of a human being in the peace of the State, with malice aforethought, either express or implied. Malice, then, is an element in the offence and discriminates it from the other crime of felonious homicide which I have mentioned, to wit, manslaughter, that is, malice express or implied, discriminates murder from the offence of manslaughter." "Express malice exists when one, by deliberate premeditation and design, formed in advance, to kill or to do bodily harm, the premeditation and design being implied from external circumstances capable of proof, such as lying in wait, antecedent threats, and concerted schemes against a victim. Implied malice is an inference of the law from any deliberate and cruel act committed by one person against another. The two kinds of malice, therefore, to repeat, indicate but one state of mind, established in different ways, the one by circumstances showing premeditation of the homicide, the other by an inference of the law from the act committed, that is, malice is inferred when one kills another without provocation, or when the provocation is not great. Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice either expressed or implied.

Black's Law Dictionary, 11th Ed. 2019

manslaughter, n. (15c) The unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought. — Also termed (in some jurisdictions) culpable homicide. Cf. murder. —
manslaughter, vb. “[Manslaughter is very difficult to define precisely, because it includes so many different types of culpability. The main line of division is between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter, the first occurring where there is an intention to do some illegal harm to a person, the second where there is no such intention. . . . Manslaughter . . . may not be the result of intent at all. It may be the consequence of negligence. This, indeed, is one of the principal causes of involuntary manslaughter, and it has long been clear that a different degree of negligence, sometimes termed ‘gross,’ ‘criminal,’ or ‘complete,’ is a necessary prerequisite of criminal liability, but these epithets have not added much from the standpoint of legal clarity.” G.W. Keeton, The Elementary Principles of Jurisprudence 315-16 (2d ed. 1949).

I seriously doubt any edition of Black's has ever used the term human creature.

Criminal Law, 4th Ed., Wayne R. LaFave, West Publishing, 2003, at 733

(f) Elements of Murder. It may be useful to summarize briefly here the required elements of murder: (1) There must be some conduct (affirmative act, or omission to act where there is a duty to act) on the part of the defendant. (2) He must have an accompanying “malicious” state of mind (intent to kill or do serious bodily injury; a depraved heart; an intent to commit a felony). (3) His conduct must “legally cause” the death of a living-human-being victim. And (4), in many jurisdictions, this death must occur within a year and a day after the defendant’s conduct thus caused the victim’s fatal injury.

Criminal Investigation, 8th Ed., Wayne W. Bennett and Karen M. Hess, Thomson Wadsworth, 2007, at 236,

Elements of the Crime
Laws on criminal homicide vary significantly from state to state, but certain common elements are usually found in each, as summarized in Table 8.1.
The degree eventually charged is decided by the prosecuting attorney based on the available evidence. For example, the only difference between first- and second-degree murder is the element of premeditation. If thorough investigation does not yield proof of premeditation, a charge of second-degree murder is made.
Causing the Death of Another Human Usually the death of a human is not difficult to prove; a death certificate completed by a physician, coroner, or medical examiner suffices. If a death certificate is not available, the investigator must locate witnesses to testify that they saw the body of the person allegedly killed by the suspect. When insufficient remains exist to identify the body positively, death is proven by circumstantial evidence such as examination by a qualified pathologist or by other experts and their expert testimony regarding dental work, bone structure, and the like.

Black's Law Dictionary, 11th Ed., 2019

first-degree murder. (1895) Murder that is willful, deliberate, or premeditated, or that is committed during the course of another dangerous felony. • All murder perpetrated by poisoning or by lying in wait is considered first-degree murder. All types of murder not involving willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing are usu. considered second-degree murder. — Also termed murder in the first degree; murder one.
second-degree murder. (1909) Murder that is not aggravated by any of the circumstances of first-degree murder. — Also termed murder in the second degree; murder two.
- - - - - - - - - -
abortion. n. (16c) 1. An artificaially induced termination of a pregnancy for the purpose of destroying an embryo or fetus. In Roe v. Wade ....
“The word ‘abortion,’ in the dictionary sense, means no more than the expulsion of a fetus before it is capable of living. In this sense it is a synonym of ‘miscarriage.’ With respect to human beings, however, it has long been used to refer to an intentionally induced miscarriage as distinguished from one resulting naturally or by accident. There has been some tendency to use the word to mean a criminal miscarriage, and there would be distinct advantages in assigning this meaning to it; but there are so many references to lawful abortion or justification for abortion that it is necessary to speak of ‘criminal abortion’ or the ‘crime of abortion’ to emphasize the element of culpability.” Rollin M. Perkins & Ronald N. Boyce, Criminal Law 186-87 (3d ed. 1982).
“Modern legal historians dispute whether, and to what extent, abortion constituted a crime at English common law. One view finds that, at most, abortion was an ecclesiastical crime, and concludes that the common law allowed a woman and her abortionist to terminate a pregnancy at all stages of gestation without secular penalties. Another claims that all abortions are at least secular wrongs to the fetus and that only the problems of proving a causal relationship between some abortions and fetal death prevented the punishment of all abortions. Substantial authority exists, however, for a middle ground: although no penalties attached to abortions before the fetus had quickened, performing a postquickening abortion was a common-law crime, most likely a misdemeanor.” Susan Frelich Appleton, “Abortion,” in 1 Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice 1, 1 (Sanford H. Kadish ed., 1983).

Abortion as a crime would likely be charged as a statutory offense, not a common law crime. Trying to define the aborted child/fetus as a human creature appears to be an attempt to evade the complications of defining it/him/her as a human being, or living human being. It would probably be best if the state define the crime as abortion, the artificially induced termination of a pregnancy for the purpose of destroying an embryo or fetus. That would avoid the argument of when an egg becomes a chicken.

If left to the states, the offense (if any), the statutory definition, and the penalty would vary by state. California may consider abortion from conception up to birth to be legal. Arkansas provides that abortion is a crime, except when it is necessary to save the life of the mother. The penalty of performing an abortion is up to 10 years and up to $100,000 fine. I doubt any state will eliminate that exception, but it could be done.

If a Federal statute law is passed, and upheld, it would return to the most recent expression of the U.S. Supreme Court.