Buffy s3e15
Thanks go to Diandra who prompted me to write this more accurate revised version.

Mistake
An example of mistake: D, is walking through a field with a gun, he sees V (another man) a few hundred yards away in the distance. He mistakes V for a scarecrow and decides to use it as target practice. D shoots V through the head and kills him. D would not be liable for murder as he never intended either to kill or to cause grievous bodily harm to anyone, he merely thought he was shooting at wood and straw. He might be guilty of manslaughter but only if the jury decide he was so negligent in his actions that he deserves to found guilty of a criminal offence.

If Faith believed that the person she was staking was a vampire then she cannot be guilty of murder. This belief does not have to be reasonable (as ruled in the case D.P.P. vs Morgan) but it must be honestly held. Whether or not it was honestly held is a question for the jury to decide and they, in turn, will be influenced by the evidence laid before them.

In Faith's favour: she would testify that she believed it was a vampire, that they had just been attacked by two other vampires and that Finch appeared to be attacking them. Buffy could confirm that she believed Finch to be a vampire and that's why she threw him to Faith, and that after the killing Faith said she didn't know he was human.

Against Faith: Finch did not have a 'game' face and did not appear to be a vampire. Buffy shouted a warning to stop before he was staked.

I repeat that it doesn't matter whether or not Faith's belief was reasonable, she would be trying to convince the jury that she honestly believed Finch to be a vampire.

If the jury, in this case us, are convinced that she honestly believed Finch was a vamp then she would not be guilty of murder. She doesn't get off that easily however, the court has the discretion to rule guilty of manslaughter even on a charge of murder.

Involuntary manslaughter
There are two kinds of manslaughter: voluntary and involuntary. Don't let the names fool you. Voluntary manslaughter was created for a very specific purpose: to avoid the mandatory life sentence for murder. The only time anyone can be convicted of voluntary manslaughter is when someone is guilty of murder but they have one of three defences: provocation, diminished responsibility or suicide pact. If one of these three is successful then the charge is bumped down to manslaughter. These defences are not available for any other offence and none of them happen to apply in this case under English law.

Involuntary manslaughter is manslaughter 'proper'. There are two kinds of involuntary manslaughter: unlawful act manslaughter (a death that results from an act which is already illegal) and gross negligent manslaughter (a death which results from such negligence that the accused deserves criminal sanctions).

Faith could be found guilty under either of these, though it might be difficult to show that Faith was sufficiently negligent to fall under the second category. The discretion is left to the jury.

Remember any charge of manslaughter can be rebuffed by a general defence, in this case self-defence mentioned above.

Self-defence
The proportionality of the force used in self-defence is judged subjectively that is how the defender saw the situation.

It was held in the case of Williams "a person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances as he believes them to be".
So if I pointed a water pistol at you and pretended it was a gun, and you honestly believed it was a gun and that I was going to kill you, then you would be fine to pull out a gun of your own and kill me, even though I no means of carrying out my threat.

If Finch was a vampire then Faith's staking would have been a proportional response. Presuming that Faith can show that she genuinely did mistake Finch for a vampire, her response, while not proportionate to the threat Finch represented, would nevertheless be excused.

Taking all these things into account I would conclude that Faith would not be convicted.

Go to Masquerade's Should Allan's death be treated as "Collateral Damage"?


Opinions

Joe 8/8/00
Faith's reflexes should have permitted her to heed Buffy's warning shout, and halt her thrust - if, that is, she wasn't so hyped up on Slaying. One could argue for a case of diminished responsibility, but this was an accident that was clearly signposted, and *somebody* should take responsibility for failing to take account of Faith's character flaw (Wesley?).


Your opinion
Webname:
Email address:
Your address will only be used to reply to your comments. It will not be passed on without your permission.

Your opinion:

Or you can
Email the Webmaster

Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel: The Series are the property of the WB Network or perhaps Fox, maybe both. I'll leave them to work it out and contact me with the result. This web site, its operators and any content on this site relating to "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" are not authorized by Fox. No copyright infringement intended. This site is for entertainment purposes only and does not profit in any way.

The picture was taken from The Official Buffy website and is © the WB.

The Above the Law banner is an altered form of a screen-cap taken from the The Slayer Show, the original screen-cap is © the WB.