Insanity Defense Essay

The insanity defence is a defence that can be used in trial by a defendant to argue that they are not guilty by reason of insanity. It is based on whether they were of sound mind at the time of the crime and whether they could differentiate between the right and wrongs of their actions. Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the laws, legislation, and tests regarding the insanity defence have evolved drastically as subsequent ways of determining insanity and who receives the defence have been deemed insufficient. Throughout the years, the defence has become less and less of a loophole for defendants trying to use it as a ‘get out of jail free card’ where they can avoid a just punishment, as now, clear, and convincing evidence to prove they

In his journal article, The Insanity Defense: The New Loophole he said, “in Pennsylvania and most other states, defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity are diverted to the mental health system, from which they are usually released within a relatively brief time, often unsupervised and on heavy doses of psychotropic medication”. Their treatment doesn’t “reduce the probability of a repetition of criminal conduct” (Caesar, 1979) . He and many other people believe the accused try and use the defence so they can avoid having a long prison sentence or in extreme cases, the death penalty as the insanity defence doesn’t allow capital punishment. Even in the case of homicide, the defendants can get out in a relatively short period of time. For example, Jeffrey Arenburg shot and killed sportscaster Brian Smith in 1995. He was found ‘not criminally responsible’ (NCR) on the account of a mental disorder, also known as not guilty by reason of insanity; he was discharged from a mental health facility in 2006 (Sisler, 2014) . If he wasn’t found not guilty due to a mental illness, then he would have got a longer sentence in prison as murder usually finds someone 15-30 years in prison or a life sentence depending on the

Because of the lengthy process of determining if someone was insane at the time of the crime, this delays what sentence the accused will receive at the end of the proceeding. Even if they know there’s a chance, they won’t be found not guilty by reason of insanity, their sentence will be delayed while they determine whether they were of sound mind at the time so they can avoid, for example, going to prison for months or even years. So even though it is not a direct loophole, it can still be used to a defendant's advantage if they try and plead this defence as they must supply evidence whether they were of sound mind at the time or not (DJN Blogs, 2021). However, the very fact that it is such a lengthy process means it is rigorous, thorough and therefore the professionals involved go to extreme lengths to ensure the diagnostic is correct which means the defence is not a