Preparatory Crime For a case to be inchoate the person that is accused of the crime must have a guilty mind, or a mens rea, to have all conspiracy against them repelled. Though for them to be guilty of all crimes they must have had intended for the crime to have happened. For a murder to be intent the defendant must have intended for the victim to have been killed. In a case of inchoate, for the defendant to be cleared you need proof of mens rea. Though they may have threatened to kill them.
These defences are available only to murder. They are also only partial defences: this means that the defendant is not completely acquitted. Instead, when one of these defences is successful, the offence of murder is reduced to manslaughter. This is important because it means that the judge has discretion in the sentence which he imposes. When a person is found guilty of murder
After the questioner the police officer will have to build a case with the evidences gathered and send a case with the evidences to CPS (Crown Prosecution Services). Then CPS could state whether it’s enough evidences gathered to take the person to court or it can state that there is not enough evidences. That where it comes to the bail. (www.findlaw.co.uk) The bail can be granted or denied it all depends what is the offence and whether the person can be dangerous if goes back to the society/community. If the person is arrested on suspicious of the murder that would be clearly obvious that the person wouldn’t get the bail, as that person could try to run away also could attempt more murders or even self-harmed.
Critics believe modern law is more concerned with the consequences of crime and less with the moral imperatives.  When a crime is committed the person should be convicted. Mental illness could be taken into account at the time of sentencing. Several states have accepted this reasoning, the insanity plea is abolished and replaced with guilty but insane. This verdict carries a criminal penalty, the defendant is sentenced to a hospital prison and the defendant must prove he is no longer dangerous or mentally ill. Advocate of the insanity defense believe that a fundamental principle of criminal law is a stake.
We the prosecution find Mr. Bartholomeu Malinger to be guilty of all charges for the murder of Mr. Jenkins Benign. The insanity defense is used in situations in which the accused did not know what he or she was doing or its consequences, or knew exactly what he or she was doing, but did not know it was wrong (statute 775.027). A felony is technically any criminal offense that is either punishable under the laws of this state, or would be punishable by death or imprisonment in a state penitentiary if committed in this state (statute 775.08). In this case, it is unlawful to issue excusable homicide; which clearly states that homicide is excusable only in the case of accident and misfortune, or if provoked and not done with a weapon or in a cruel and unusual manner (statute 782.03). The state statute for murder (statute 782.04) states that the unlawful killing of a human being without any premeditated design to affect the death of any particular individual is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony in the first degree.
Week 6 Check Point: Mind Over Matter By Mary Setzer The difference between mental illness and insanity is that insanity is a more severe form of mental illness where a person fails to realize what is real and what is fantasy. The M'Naghten rule can't be used to defend the actions of someone who drinks alcohol because drinking is a voluntary act. Had the person not had alcohol, they would not have committed a crime. If someone receives a rational and guilty verdict after committing a crime, it means that the person convicted knew what they were doing and aware of the consequences. A guilty but insane verdict means that the person convicted was insane to have killed someone (for example) but realizes what they have done is wrong.
Dr. Jones, a court-appointed psychiatrist, asks the two to write their life histories. Smith's is rambling and detailed, revealing more about his dreadful childhood; Hickock's is succinct and generic. Extensive, detailed psychiatric profiles of both killers, written by Dr. Jones, appear in full text. The two killers are not able to utilize the insanity plea to their benefit, because Kansas applies the M'Naughten Rule in its death penalty cases, which states that if the accused could distinguish right from wrong at the time of the crime, that person is legally sane. The two are ultimately found guilty at trial and given the death
With respect to murder, the penal code under section 200 explicitly states that any person who of malice aforethought’; thus, demands the need of the mens rea. Malice aforethought relates to the state of mind of the accused person at the time he caused the death of the deceased. malice aforethought may be either express malice which demands an intention to cause death or do grievous bodily harm, implied malice which entails proof of knowledge (knowledge that may be accompanied by indifference) that the act or omission will probably result into causing death or grievous harm to the person or constructive malice which requires the accused person to cause death while attempting or committing a felony. On the other hand, the mens rea of murder which is malice aforethought is not linked to manslaughter. This is why manslaughter is a less serious offence than murder.
Clinically insane people are hard to predict. Stereotypes have shown that some have multiple personalities, while others have hallucinations. The clinically insane, when they commit a serious crime, should not be tried in a court of law for the act of their mental instability. When it comes to a crime, such as murder, the evidence is usually of the incriminating type making the accused look guilty, unless all of it has been scientifically proven otherwise. In Primal Fear, Aaron Stampler has been given a label as insane, in order to convince his defense lawyer, Martin Vale, that he is as innocent as he appears.
One of the main messages he is trying to deliver to us is to always weigh what you achieve to what the consequences will be. This especially holds true for Macbeth, as when first contemplating if he should kill Duncan, not once did he think of how he could be punished. Also, when Macbeth first hears the witch’s prophecy of him being a king, he jumps directly to the idea of murder. This kind of thinking is exhibited in Macbeth’s monologue in scene 5 act 5, where he discus’s the uselessness of living, and this attitude towards life made him go mad. This also points to how unintelligent Macbeth really was.