Which of the following is NOT considered a form of malice under common law?

The concept of malice under common law refers to a person's intent or mindset when committing a crime. It is a critical element in distinguishing between different degrees of homicide. Malice can manifest in several ways, which include the intent to kill, the intent to inflict serious bodily harm, or acting with extreme recklessness that demonstrates a disregard for human life.

In this context, pure accident does not qualify as a form of malice because it lacks the necessary intent or recklessness associated with the other forms. When an act is purely accidental, it indicates that the individual did not intend to cause harm nor did they act with disregard for potential consequences. Thus, without the requisite mental state aligned with malice, pure accident cannot be classified within that realm of culpability.

The other options—intent to kill, intent to inflict serious bodily harm, and extreme recklessness—clearly demonstrate a conscious choice or an extreme disregard for the safety of others, all of which exemplify malicious intent. Understanding that malice requires a certain state of mind clarifies why pure accident stands apart as it entirely lacks that component.