What steps must be taken to prove insanity? When the defense claims that their client was not in a state of understanding for what he or she did due to mental disorder is often known as the insanity defense. This is to show that the defendant was unaware at what he or she was doing and should not be held accountable for the alleged actions. In this particular case the term insanity is used more legally than medically, so it is the court’s decision on if there should be a medical professional involved or not. Stu Dents was charged with homicide, kidnapping, assault of a police officer, burglary, and crimes related to drugs.
It is smart, but not fair. A similar case happened a few years ago. In the case of John Errol Ferguson, he was delusional believing that as the Prince of God, he was being executed so he can save the world from communism, among with other paranoid delusions. Ferguson cannot rationally connect his criminal punishment and perceive the finality of the execution (MENTAL ILLNESS 1). The difference between James Holmes and John Ferguson is that John had already been diagnosed with a mental disorder years before he
Why do the criminals try to make it even worse? Hopefully some valid points can be brought to light about this subject matter. An insanity defense is a plea used by a defendant, to say that they are not guilty because they were lacking the mental capacity to understand that they
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.
But in contrast there are very different at the same time. The crime control model is used in the criminal justice system for the prevention of crime. The crime control does not exclude that is possible to make a mistake, but based on the circumstances of the laws, the person is considered guilty until her or she is proven innocent. This model is based on old fashion laws which allow rapid and speedy convictions despite the mitigating factors of the case and the victim. The results, of the crime control model are wrongful convictions, being over-turned and this is a major downfall in the criminal justice system.
Mind Over Matter Checkpoint McNaughten rule states that it must be clearly proven that at the time of committing the crime the accused, did not know that what they were doing was wrong because of some from defect of reason , from disease of the mind. The difference between between mental illness and insanity is the degree of mental instability the person suffers from. I mentally ill person would have severe depression, anxiety. Signs would be present and sometimes easy to spot, but these people know what is going on and know have a grip on reality. An insane person would not know the difference between reality and fantasy.
While it can be hard to understand why someone would falsely confess to a crime, psychological research has provided some answers and DNA exonerations have proven that the problem is more widespread than many people think. In approximately 25% of the wrongful convictions overturned with DNA evidence, defendants made false confessions, admissions or statements to law enforcement officials. In some false confession cases, details of the crime are inadvertently communicated to a suspect by police during questioning. Later, when a suspect knows these details, the police take the knowledge as evidence of guilt. Often, threats or promises are made to the suspect off camera and then the camera is turned on for a false confession.
According to the Legal Resource Library, “The biggest drawback to plea bargaining is for the innocent defendant who decides to plead guilty to a lesser charge in order to avoid the risk that he or she will be found guilty at trial.” Plea bargaining requires the defendant to waive three rights that he/she is normally protected by until the Fifth and Sixth Amendments: the right to a jury trial, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to confront hostile witnesses. (Cornell.edu) Some people may try to argue that plea bargaining in unconstitutional, however, this argument has been repeatedly overruled by the Supreme Court. There are a lot of controversial issues surrounding plea bargaining, and victims’ rights groups are arguing that the victim should have inputs and a voice into the bargain that is being established between the prosecutor and the defendant. Victim rights activists also feel that defendants undermine the criminal justice system in its entirety and defendants are let off too
Sparing the innocent victims who would be spared, ex hypothesi, by the nonexecution of murderers would be more important to me than the execution, however just, of murderers. But although there is a lively discussion of the subject, no serious evidence exists to support the hypothesis that executions produce a higher murder rate. Cf. Phillips, The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: New Evidence on an Old Controversy, 86 AM. J. SOC.
Content Book 1 – Extra Social Factors Suicide and Psychopathic states: Durkheim, as mentioned in the introduction, conducted the study of suicide to prove that it was social, rather than extra social factors that influenced suicide. The first extra social factor, to which suicide was mostly attributed to is insanity. Durkheim investigated this theory and pointed out that if suicide was caused by a certain insanity then this would be termed as ‘monomania’ – in Durkheim’s words, “a delirium of localized nature” that is, a person is otherwise normal but has sudden desires to drink or use abusive language. It was believed that a sudden emotional disturbance was enough to provoke monomania. However, Durkheim rejected this theory for two reasons; one, there is no concrete proof to show the existence of monomania, second, mental functions are completely dependent on one another, and insanity is present in one area, then it should also be present in another as well, that is if insanity affects one function it should affect at the other functions as well.