A lot has been made of the mens rea, or the mental element, required in our homicide laws. So we have two different types of homicide in our laws—just to clarify this, because I, too, have worked in the criminal justice system for about a decade. There is murder, which can be committed through two types of mens rea: one is through intentional death, and the other is through committing a violent act or an unlawful act where foreseeable, serious harm was taken into account by the offender. Those are the two ways that murder is committed. That's supposed to be recklessness and intent. So the recklessness requirement seems to have been misunderstood by the Opposition as being the mens rea requirement for manslaughter. That's not the case. Both of those types of mens rea mean that the person will be held accountable for murder. So if you foresaw really serious harm or death, that's murder. Manslaughter doesn't require foreseeability of the harm, it only requires that the unlawful act itself was committed intentionally. Any assault counts. You don't have to prove that death or serious harm was foreseeable. So it's covered. It's homicide, and the sentence is life, if needs be.