"If there is no intent to do something wrong or reckless, it won't even be involuntary manslaughter, even if someone dies as a result."
Intent is not an element of an action, necessarily. Accidents happen and people die. As I said, the result stands on its own as a convictable offense if reckless abandon or gross disregard can be proven, absent any intent for the outcome that occured. Your statement is opposite to this. "Evil mind" is not needed when carelessness beyond the standard that a reasonable man would accept exists. Please elaborate.
OK, let me spell it out clearly.
Intent does not have to be intent to commit the crime. But, even for involuntary manslaughter, intent to do something which, even unintentionally, causes the death of another, must be an element of the crime. A
pure accident, over which one exercises no choice, cannot cause a crime.
To give a gross example, a meteor fall from the sky, striking a man, knocking him off an overpass. He lands on another, killing the other, but himself escapes relatively unscathed. That is a pure accident, over which the man exerts zero control. He is not guilty of involuntary manslaughter, as he has no intent.
OTOH, a person gets behind the wheel of a car while under the influence of a legal prescription drug that carries a warning against operating machinery. On the road, a dog jumps out into his way. He swerves to miss the dog, hitting a bystander that he hadn't noticed, killing him. Surely the driver had no intent to kill anyone. Heck, he was trying to save the dog! Such is often referred to as an "accident."
However, he did have intent: intent to recklessly operate the vehicle while under the influence.
Again, criminal intent does not have to be intent to commit a particular crime. Criminal intent could merely be the conscious decision to take an otherwise lawful action that eventually results in the crime.
By way of another example, one shoots at a bank teller during the commission of a robbery and misses. The bullet strikes another person, killing him. The robber is guilty of intentional murder. He did not intend to kill the other person. So, again, we can see that criminal intent is not necessarily the intent to do the crime, but intent to do something that either directly or indirectly (sometimes very indirectly) causes the crime.