Basically, defendants accused of a crime can acknowledge that they committed the crime but argue that they are not responsible for it because of their mental illness, by pleading "not guilty by reason of insanity." The insanity defense is part of a class
Nicole Nixon Ron Davis Judicial Process April 17, 2012 Are You Insane? When you watch crime shows on television you see defense attorneys always use an insanity defense when they go to trial, the insanity defense is one of the most popularly depicted criminal defense strategies in television and film culture. The issue with this depiction is that the public is given a distorted view of who uses the defense and how it is employed. An inanity defense can be defined as “A defense asserted by an accused in a criminal prosecution to avoid liability for the commission of a crime because, at the time of the crime, the person did not appreciate the nature or quality or wrongfulness of the acts.” (Legal Dictionary) The truth about the insanity defense is that only one-percent of criminal defendants employ the defense. Also, criminals rarely “get away with it” by pleading insanity.
In this speech I am going to tell you about the types of insanity defense that are used in court cases, the process that goes into verifying a criminals sanity, and the issues that come about after a plea is entered. Now I’m going to explain what insanity is and the different types associate with it. The insanity defense plea as defined in law journals is a defense that’s asserted by the accused in a criminal prosecution as a way to avoid liability for a commission of a crime because at the time of the crime the person did not appreciate the nature or quality or wrongfulness of the acts. Cognitive insanity is the most common variation of an insanity defense that goes through the court system. This is where the defendant during the time of the crime suffered from a mental disease that impaired his/her psychological ability to see the wrongfulness of the act they committed.
Approximately 70% of these cases were the results of agreements between the prosecution and defense. If they disagree expert witnesses are required to testify at a jury trial. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, Mental illness, and criminal insanity are different concepts. Many criminals can have major mental illnesses but are not be considered criminally insane. A person accused of a crime
Schizophrenia cannot be diagnosed if an existing mood disorder or developmental disorder has been diagnosed, or if there are organic origins. Diagnosis is complicated by having to rule these things out. However, some individuals do not fit within the categories created. Schizophrenia has a strong co-morbidity with mood disorders that it is considered a fundamental characteristic. Buckley et al (2009) identified the following co-morbidities with schizophrenia and suggested that they might represent sub types of schizophrenia: panic disorder 15%, post traumatic stress 29%,
CJ 400 Anatomy of a Murder REVIEW AND SUMMARY OF INSANITY DEFENSE The term ‘insanity’ has two distinct definitions in the fields of law and medicine. The legal term is defined as, “…a mental illness of such a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality, cannot conduct her/his affairs due to psychosis, or is subject to uncontrollable impulsive behavior.” (The People's Law Dictionary) In medicine, the term insanity is no longer used. Insanity as a medical term was replaced with mental illness which can be defined as, “Any of various disorders characterized chiefly by abnormal behavior or an inability to function socially, including diseases of the mind and personality and certain diseases of the brain.” (Roget's II 1995) Taking into consideration the very vague difference between the two definitions, it is important to note that the legal definition adds that the term insanity used in the court room is in no way a medical diagnosis for mental illness. One definition of insanity follows the other. After medical professionals deem a person mentally ill, the court room can then proceed to conclude an insanity defense.
Since insanity is defined so arbitrarily, lawyers can protect their clients from their punishments with relative ease by dragging out the legal process for years at a time by using the insanity defense. To be protected with the insanity defense in many states, a criminal must take the M'Naghten test: failure to determine right from wrong deems the criminal insane (Cornell University Law School). Although some argue that people with mental illnesses cannot be held accountable for their actions, the greater concern should be for the overall safety for The United States of America because criminals who plead insanity can be a danger when released, legal definitions of insanity vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, Supreme Court has upheld four states' abolishing of insanity defense, and there is incomplete research on insanity. Shafer !2 Insane criminals who are found not guilty by reason of insanity are sent to mental hospitals to rehabilitate and treat their illness. The problem is that the criminals who are sent to a hospital and become "cured" could be a danger to society.
This code states that the person is capable for using this defense in the case of mental insanity if the do not have the ability to appreciate the fact that they have committed a crime and what that entails or that they are unable to conform to the moral and legal codes of society. (ALI Moral Penal Code (1962)) In regards to this case, I feel that the defendant did know what he was doing but do to the fact that he was either under the influence of the drugs at the time and dor he was mentally unstable and believed that he was saving her rather than killing her when he committed the crime. The reason that I feel that we can use this defense is the fact that the defendant ranted about aliens and the fact that he was god when the officers went to arrest him. He also kept a journal until he decided the time was right to perform the "saving" of the
If these delusions and beliefs are not understandable to cultural peers and not related to ordinary life experiences, they are deemed to be bizarre (The American Psychiatric Association, 2013). These abnormalities are accompanied by negative symptoms, also known as affective or mood
Both of these rulings require that the conditions must be a result of mental defect of some sort. (Greene et al, 2006) Although hard to believe, the Insanity Defense is not used as often as a lot of people think, and the main reason why is because this type of defense is very hard to prove. For example; back in 1991, the results of a major eight-state study conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health concluded that less than 1% of the county court cases involved insanity defense, and that out of all of those cases, around 1 in 4 was successful. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry, 1991) The most common issues with this type of defense often arise because of the frequency that the legal definition of insanity differs depending on the state, and the fact that there is minimal accurate testing equipment and procedures to test for insanity. When it comes to dealing and treating with the confinement of mentally ill inmates is finding mental