Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Insanity as a defence
Mental illness within the criminal justice system
Why the insanity defense is bad
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Insanity Defense Former U.S president Ronald Reagan was shot by a man named John Hinckley in the year 1981. The president along with many of his entourage survived the shooting despite the heavy infliction of internal and external injuries. The Hinckley case is a classic example of the 'not guilty by reason of insanity' case (NGRI). The criminal justice system under which all men and women are tried holds a concept called mens rea, a Latin phrase that means "state of mind". According to this concept, Hinckley committed his crime oblivious of the wrongfulness of his action. A mentally challenged person, including one with mental retardation, who cannot distinguish between right and wrong is protected and exempted by the court of law from being unfairly punished for his/her crime. (1) What is "insanity" and why is this subject of much controversy? Although I do not have a clear definition of insanity, most socially recognized authorities such as psychiatrists, medical doctors, and lawyers agree that it is a brain disease. However, in assuming it is a brain disease, should we link insanity with other brain diseases like strokes and Parkinsonism? Unlike the latter two, whose causes can be medically accounted for through a behavioral deficit such as paralysis, and weakness, how can one explain the behavior of crimes done by people like Hinckley? (2) Much of my skepticism over the insanity defense is how this act of crime has been shifted from a medical condition to coming under legal governance. The word "insane" is now a legal term. A nuerological illness described by doctors and psychiatrists to a jury may explain a person's reason and behavior. It however seldom excuses it. The most widely known rule in... ... middle of paper ... ... a reversible state. When the defendant no longer tests positive in legal tests, an insane person miraculously becomes sane. Unfortunately, the same law does not account or recognize the physical, emotional or psychological states that may or may not be reversible. Works Cited: 1)All About the Insanity Defense, Mark Godo http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal%5Fmind/ 2) Does Insanity "Cause" crime? : Thomas Szasz, M.D., The Myth of Mental Illness (1960) 3)M'Naghten Rule http://www.law.cornell.edu/journals.html 4)The Yates case: Commentary for United Press International; Susan Crump is a former prosecutor for Houston http://www.geocities.com/mental_illness 5) Donald E. Watson, MD taught and did research in nueropsychology, teaches at UC Irvine Medical School. http://www.enformy.com/ 6) Statistics http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal%5Fmind/
In the 1959 film Anatomy of a Murder Lieutenant Frederick Manion is accused and tried for the murder of Barney Quill; the accused rapist of Mrs. Manion, the wife of the defendant. Citing temporary insanity due to an “irresistible impulse” to seek justice for his wife’s rape, a jury finds Lt. Manion not guilty in the death of Barney Quill by reason of insanity Although the Hollywood interpretation of the insanity defense in Anatomy of a Murder results in a verdict favorable to the defense, this is not typically the case in real life criminal trials due to the specificity of circumstances that are required to support that defense. Specifically, if Lt. Manion’s trial were a real case and tried in the state of Maryland in the year 2014, his defense strategy
The notion of the mentally ill being more likely to commit crime is a topic that is highly controversial and sparks much debate. However, I do believe that it is evident that mental illness can cause irrational and sometimes dangerous behavior, which not only do I find threatening, but more so sad. In the case of Luke Batty’s murder by his biological father Greg Anderson, not only do I feel extreme sorrow towards the victim, but I also empathise with the perpetrator, due to the fact that mental illness is clearly mishandled and overlooked in our justice system.
Szasz, Thomas Stephen, "The myth of mental illness; foundations of a theory of personal conduct", New York : Hoeber-Harper, 1961.
Andrea Yates being escorted into a police station after the drowning of her five children.
Insanity (legal sense): A person can be declared insane if they are conscious while committing the crime, committing the criminal act voluntarily, and had no intent to inflict harm. A person declared insane lacks rational intent due to a deficit or disorder, which inhibits their rational thinking
How is that even possible? The dictionary definition of the word insanity is the state of being seriously, mentally ill (“Definition of the Word Insanity”). Insanity is also classified as a medical diagnosis. Insanity came from the Latin word insanitatem (“History of the Word Insanity”). People started using this word in the 1580’s. The Latins interpreted insanity as unhealthy Modern day society uses the word insanity too loosely. Although the dictionary definition of insanity is not wrong, several cases that prove having “insanity” does not always mean “being seriously mentally ill” has came to surface.
The video “Dogs and More Dogs” presents one of the most perplexing questions in evolutionary biology: how did the diversity of dogs evolve from a relatively homogeneous population of wolves. Anthropological data suggests that dogs came into existence some fifteen thousand years ago. In terms of the history of earth and the majority of the organisms that inhibit it, dogs are still very young. It is thus very remarkable that one species (wolves), which must have looked somewhat alike, could have given rise to the huge differences we see between the Chihuahua and the Golden Retriever.
Law Commission, 'Criminal Liability: Insanity and Automatism', (Discussion Paper) para 1.61, citing/referring to; N Sartorius, “Stigma of Mental Illness: A Global View” in L B Cottler (ed), 'Mental Health in Public Health: the Next 100 Years' (2011) p 213-222 & H Schulze, 'Reducing the Stigma of Mental Illness: A Report from a Global Programme of the World Psychiatric Association' (2005)
When someone commits a crime, he or she may use mental illness as a defense. This is called an insanity plea or insanity defense. What the insanity defense does is try to give the alleged perpetrator a fair trial. At least in extreme cases, society agrees with this principle. The problem is where do we draw the line. Under what circumstances is a person considered insane, and when are they not? The trouble with the insanity defense in recent years is the assumption that virtually all criminals have some sort of mental problem. One important point is that the crime itself, no matter how appalling, does not demonstrate insanity. Today, the insanity defense has become a major issue within the legal system. If the defendant is clearly out of touch with reality, the police and district attorney ordinarily agree to bypass the trial and let the defendant enter a mental hospital.
According to the article” The Durham rule was eventually rejected by the federal courts, because it cast too broad a net. Alcoholics, compulsive gamblers, and drug addicts had successfully used the defense to defeat a wide variety of crimes,”(Insanity) this shows how people would abuse the insanity defense to get out of a crime. There was this case where John Hinckley schizophrenia, and was charged of assault because he beat a stranger in the bus for no reason. John was explaining he was hearing voices that he could not control. He knew what he did was wrong, but his impulse was uncontrollable, and because of his problem he was not guilty.
The insanity plea, or the “irresistible impulse” defense, described by Martin (1998) as “a plea that defendants are not guilty because they lacked the mental capacity to realize that they committed a wrong or appreciate why it was wrong.” Remains a very controversial within the judicial system, with many believing that the defense attempts to fake a purportedly guilty man’s insanity, more often to make sure the defendant gets a less harsh conviction or the possibility of an acquittal. While the plea is truly helpful to many who suffer from mental illness, many who do not suffer from illness try to use it as a get-out of-jail-free card.
Another factor that was not controlled for was personality disorders. Given the limitations in the SIQ-JR’s ability to predict suicide attempts in males, it is important to look at all factors that could help increase the success and accuracy of suicide risk assessments. It is possible that knowledge of personality disorders among male participants would help detect suicidal ideation when these participants are less willing to report suicidal feelings.
Shaffer, D. (1988). The epidemiology of teen suicide: An examination of Risk Factors. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 36-41. PMID 3047106.
Insanity, comes from the Latin word sanus, meaning healthy. Insane is meant to be the opposite, sick or of unsound mind. # In the court of law, the jury must prove that at the time of the crime, the defendant was not in a sane mind. The attorneys job is to prove without a doubt, that the defendant was not in control of their actions, at the time the crime was committed. Once this is done and the verdict is given, if found guilty by reason of insanity, the person is usually sent to a mental hospital, where treatment can be give. Once at the hospital the patient is then give therapy and even drugs if needed. At the time when the person and the doctors feel he/she are capable of going back into society, and when they are no longer a harm, then they can be let out. This puts fear into society, because a once dangerous criminal might now be let out to the streets. However the insanity plea as been around for many years, and is not used in every court case, and there is long determination to prove that the person does have a mental illness, and to prove that its is not gear to get a harsher term.
There are two theories that justify punishment: retributivism according to which punishment ensures that justice is done, and utilitarianism which justifies punishment because it prevents further harm being done. The essence of defences is that those who do not freely choose to commit an offence should not be punished, especially in those cases where the defendant's actions are involuntary. All three of these defences concern mental abnormalities. Diminished responsibility is a partial statutory defence and a partial excuse. Insanity and automatism are excuses and defences of failure of proof. While automatism and diminished responsibility can only be raised by the defendant, insanity can be raised by the defence or the prosecution. It can be raised by the prosecution when the defendant pleads diminished responsibility or automatism. The defendant may also appeal against the insanity verdict. With insanity and diminished responsibility, the burden of proof is on the defendant. With automatism the burden of proof is on the prosecution and they must negate an automatism claim beyond reasonable doubt.