murder and involuntary manslaughter - Law Reform Commission

3.34 In the Commission’s view, the point is to filter the category ofmurder to include the most heinous killings in that category. It is not a caseof having a kind of murder. Rather, some extreme indifference killings aremore heinous than some intentional killings, and therefore deserve to becalled murder proper. Comparatively, the broad global view is that extremeindifference killings are murder. 313.35 Regarding opposition to the Commission’s provisionalrecommendation on the basis that introducing an “extreme indifference” testalong the lines of the MPC formula would make the law more complicated,it can be answered that juries in Idaho and Indiana, where the extremeindifference test is used, understand the definition without apparentdifficulty. The Commission believes that sceptics of the “extremeindifference” test confuse complexity with unfamiliarity. Perhaps theresistance towards the MPC test can be explained by the fact that it is notpart of the furniture of this jurisdiction.3.36 The Commission does not believe that Irish juries would havemore difficulty understanding a MPC-type formula than juries in otherjurisdictions where such a test applies. The MPC model was chosen becausethe Commission wanted to address the issue of “extreme indifference” anddid not want to invent a test, but rather thought it prudent to adopt one thatworked well in practice. The Commission is more concerned with theprinciple embodied by the MPC model rather than with the exactphraseology. Although some commentators might think that the MPC modelis inelegantly worded, it was chosen because it is a tried and tested formula –it has the dust of jurisprudence on its boots.3.37 On the possibility of introducing a new homicide structure basedon degrees of culpability which was raised by numerous consultees, theCommission notes that the Law Commission of England and Walesrecommended a fundamental restructuring of the law of homicide in 2006. 32The Law Commission envisioned a ladder-like configuration of homicidewith first degree murder at the top of the ladder attracting a mandatory lifepenalty. First degree murder would arise where a person (a) killedintentionally or (b) killed where there was an intention to do serious injury,coupled with an awareness of a serious risk of causing death. Second degreemurder would have a discretionary life maximum penalty and would arise3132See McAuley “Modelling Intentional Action” (1987) The Irish Jurist 179, at 192where the author observes that criminal lawyers who read the decisions of the Houseof Lords are in danger of unlearning that “mens rea in murder is a moral rather than apsychological concept. Or, as a civilian might put it, that pure intention is only oneform of dolus.”Law Commission for England and Wales Murder, Manslaughter and Infanticide(2006) Law Com No 304.61