More handpicked essays just for you.
Arguments for the insanity defense
Psychological cauises of criminal behavior
Eamples of abusing the insanity defense
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
A properly trained Forensic Psychologist is needed to make a proper evaluation of a potentially insane defendant in any case where insanity is suspected. This is a necessary area of specialty for psychology, leading to the formation of Forensic Psychologists, because of the demand for such evaluations. This case is significant because it led to the formation of a niche for psychologists to specialize in. Competency evaluations for insanity are a big part of legal cases because of this case pertaining to potentially insane defendants. There are several crimes where an evaluator is needed to decipher the competence of whether an individual is insane because the insanity plea has become a common one.
Dr. Mark Nolan, Senior Lecturer at ANU College of Law, says that the NGRI plea “enables defendants to avoid criminal liability and standard criminal punishment” (Nolan 8). The main disagreement with America is the focus whether if the “guilty defendant” pursues to misuse the “Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity” as an alternative to imprisonment or if the criminally accused was at the time of committing the crime “clinically insane” and in need psychotherapy. Therefore, during this discussion of opposing viewpoints concerning the insanity defense being misused or ethical are going to be
In the field of criminal law there is a certain type of criminal defense that comes to the court and has a low success rate. These cases concern the mental capacity of the defendant and if they have enough mental capacity, or are sane enough, to be aware of their crime and consequences of crime. The insanity defense is extremely rare because of how difficult it is for the defense to prove to the court and jury that the defendant did not have the mental capacity to understand what they did wrong and the consequences from it. The case of Myers III v. State of Indiana is one example of criminal responsibility and mental capacity. This case has information that can be connected to the textbook with the insanity defense tests, mental competence
By claiming insanity a defendant has stated that he or she did not know the action was wrong and could not fully comprehend the results of this action. Kuersten then supplies the reader with more details of a particular case, the Reagan shooting, by stating how the depositions from a Neurologists and a Psychiatrist's benefited the case, permitting the judge and jury to have a more scientific understanding of the evidence. “The shooter’s brain has relatively enlarged sulci and ventricles, signifying shrinkage and decay. A psychiatrists testifies that these characteristics are associated with Schizophrenia.” With this knowledge about the defendant's brain jurors may be leaning towards the insanity plea with sympathetic views towards the defendant's actions.
So what can be done? A few numbers of American writers have argued that the insanity defence should be abolished. Two arguments have been relied upon. The first is that the insane defendant should be able to rely upon the same defenses as a sane defendant. For an instance, if an insane person lacks mens rea for an offence he deserves to be acquitted.
What exactly is the insanity defense? In a criminal trial situation the insanity defense is used to explain that the defendant was not responsible for his or her actions at the time the crime was committed due to a mental health illness or a mental handicap. Now you have to think of the reasoning, is this form of defense used as an actual defense for one who irresponsibly committed a crime or as a last resort hoping for an acquittal before a defendant is about to be handed a guilty verdict? Most people being asked would say it is being used for sane people trying to get out of a crime they committed, but I believe the insanity defense is misunderstood by society and should strictly be used for its creation of mentally ill individuals.
During my true crime podcast era, I came across Andrea Yates. Yates was a mother who killed her five young children by drowning them in a bathtub. While listening to this case, it was revealed that the insanity plea, or also known as the insanity defense, was used. It got me thinking about how the plea works and how people would allow this outcome over a jail sentence. The insanity plea is a tough topic to tackle in the world of criminal law.
Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (NGRI) is a form of insanity defense that allows for an individual to not be found guilty of a crime due to a mental defect or disease that results in a lack of mens rea, or the capability to intentionally commit a crime. However, simply having a mental illness or defect does not guarantee that an offender will be found NGRI. Not only would a defendant have to have a major or severe mental illness or disease, but the defendant would have to prove that their condition impaired them so greatly as to not have any control over their behavior or any concept that they had done anything wrong at the time of the offense. Although Bob undoubtedly had a diminished capacity for logic and reason in this case, the example as given does not provide enough detail to determine the nature of Bob’s personality or his potential motives in committing this crime. Nevertheless, there is one major flaw to Bob’s insanity defense: he tried to hide the crime.
Chapter Eight: The Demoniac and the Witch According to Levack, witchcraft is defined as “the infliction of harm or misfortune” caused by a magical being or power that the witch received from the Devil. Witches were persecuted under law, while demoniacs were not held responsible for their behaviors while possessed. Because many believed that these possessions were genuine and not an actor in a play, they could not be held responsible.
This case, while Monte Durham wasn’t able to be proven insane, lead to reformations of the M’naghten Rule that would eventually be called the Durham Rule. Going back to Fersch’ book, this would implement more scientific approaches to determine if somebody was legally insane (3). Later in 1984, President Reagan would implement the Comprehensive Crime Control Act that required criminals to prove that they are mentally insane. With the history of the insanity defense concluded, let us take a look at some cases where the insanity defense is involved as the criminal’s reason for their
An incident where pleading insanity worked in one’s favor is heard in the case of Lee Robin. Lee Robin was a 30-year-old doctor who was charged with murder of his wife and his two year old daughter. Robin admitted to killing his wife with an ax and drowning his infant daughter. After the murders, Robin called the police and reported that there was “a problem” at his home. Soon after, the police arrived.
The fact is that the insanity plea only covers those who are truly insane, and even then, they must provide “clear and convincing evidence”, meaning that there must be some sort of absolute that provides their excuse.(Source C) Many of the crimes that are pleaded for insanity actually fall under diminished capacity. This is where the controversy is born, under the belief that those who are pleading for insanity are only incapacitated, not insane. The Courts are able to distinguish these differences. “Insanity plea statistics reveals that almost 70% of defendants withdrew their defense on insanity plea when their respective state appointed experts found out that they were legally san persons.”
The insanity defense proves defendants not guilty by arguing that at the time of the crime they lacked the mental capacity to realize that they were committing a crime. This defense is currently used in 46 states, some of which allow defendants to argue that they had no control over their actions even if they realized that what they were doing was unlawful (Mental Health America). The insanity defense was created to impose a moral check on the judicial system; many people argued that if children aren’t punished for crimes because they are too young to realize that their actions are wrong, then adults who aren’t mentally capable of making this distinction shouldn’t be punished either. This defense, however, is often abused, which defeats its
He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, but his plea was later rejected (Murdock & Navasky). Insanity is most well-known as a criminal defense plea, but is also considered to be a lack of mental stability. Many people may not know that there are different types of tests to evaluate the credibility of the defense plea. The insanity defense plea originated in England because of the case
For example, people try using insanity as a defense when being prosecuted in a criminal case. (Math, Kumar, and Moirangthem) It is based on the assumptions that at the time of the crime, the defendant was not suffering from severe mental illness. Therefore, they were well aware that they were committing a crime.
