I. Opening remarks To begin to understand the question in hand, the reader must first comprehend a brief history behind the ‘Insanity Defence’, what is actually meant by the term and most importantly; under what grounds it should remain, despite criticism and its desired abolishment. This paper will look at situations in which the Insanity Defence proved necessary and the benefits and drawbacks of the defence in instances relating to legal matters in the criminal field. Thus; in this sense, the term Insanity Defence can be defined as; “not punishable is he who commits an act which cannot be attributed to him because of poorly developed or pathologically disturbed mental capacities.” In such circumstances, the insane defendant shall be compulsorily admitted to treatment in a mental hospital, thus as such, raising the fact that through pleading insane, the defendant “risks to be deprived of his freedom for an …show more content…
II. The history of the Insanity Defence The birth of the Insanity Defence can be traced back to the first act that established a set procedure for the indefinite detention of mentally ill offenders, the “Act for the safe custody of insane persons charged with offences” of 1800, this set procedure “applied to people charged with treason, murder, or felony who were acquitted on the grounds of insanity or who appeared to be insane when apprehended, brought in for arraignment or summoned for discharge due to a lack of prosecution.” In the wake of this, in 1843 the Queen v. M’Naghten case, in which Daniel M’Naghten shot and killed the secretary of the British Prime Minister proved to be an important cornerstone for the development of the Insanity plea and for what is known as ‘M’Naghten rule.’ This rule, established by the United Kingdom’s House of Lords, states: "Every man is to be