Manslaughter

Legal definiton 

Section 141 of the Criminal Code:

(1) Whoever intentionally kills another person in a state of strong emotional disturbance due to fear, shock, confusion, or other excusable mental agitation, or as a result of prior reprehensible conduct by the victim, shall be punished by imprisonment for three to ten years.

(2) The perpetrator shall be punished by imprisonment for five to fifteen years if the criminal offence mentioned in paragraph 1 is committed

a) against two or more persons,

b) against a pregnant woman,

c) against a child under fifteen years of age.

Subjective aspect - intent

Manslaughter is an intentional criminal offence. A criminal offence is committed intentionally if the perpetrator wanted to violate or endanger a legally protected interest in the manner specified by the Criminal Code (direct intent), or if the perpetrator knew that his actions could result in such a violation or endangerment and accepted the possibility of it occurring (indirect intent).

If the act can be deemed as mere negligence rather than intent, it does not constitute the described criminal offence. 

Defense

In crimes against life and health, even seemingly minor details can have a fundamental impact on the outcome of the criminal proceedings. This not only affects whether the person will be convicted or acquitted but also which specific crime may be attributed to their actions.

In practice, there can be a fine line between assessing different crimes. For instance, "simple" manslaughter through negligence carries a penalty of up to three years imprisonment, whereas intentional murder with premeditation or after prior consideration carries a penalty of up to twenty years. Further statutory elements can lead to life imprisonment.

The mentioned thin line can also exist between murder and manslaughter. In both cases, the perpetrator's intent is directed towards killing the victim. However, in the case of manslaughter, there are very specific circumstances that, compared to murder, result in lower social harm and, therefore, a significantly lighter punishment.

There are various defense strategies available. Given the elements of this crime, the following questions may be relevant:

• Did the death result from the perpetrator's actions?
• Was the killing premeditated, and if so, for how long and in what manner?
• What was the relationship between the perpetrator and the victim?
• Did the victim provoke the perpetrator (e.g., through a previous attack, reprehensible behavior, or requests for euthanasia)?
• Are there any circumstances excluding unlawfulness present (e.g., self-defense)?
• Was the perpetrator sane at the time of the act? Were they under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or mental illness?
• Was the perpetrator's intent directed towards the decisive facts?

In criminal offences against life and health, it is particularly important to thoroughly reconstruct the entire course of the relevant actions and their context. An expert opinion can play a significant role in clarifying how the attack was carried out, its direction, the weapon used, and the intensity of the attack, and what consequences it could objectively cause. This affects the assessment of the perpetrator's intent or lack thereof.

Similarly, the expert opinion can address the consequences of the perpetrator's actions or what the perpetrator could realistically have anticipated under the specific circumstances.