|
The concept has existed since ancient Greece and Rome, being re-codifed across the centuries, the first full transcipt for an insanity trial dates from 1724. But despite the antiquity of the concept the insanity defense is still open to controversy and defendants rarely enter such pleas. The problems centre around the definition of insanity in the criminal law context. Legal definitions are repeatedly refined through cases - but a popular definition is the McNaghten rules which define insanity as "the inability to distinguish right from wrong." It dates from England, 1844 (based on a 1843 trial) and was first applied in the US in 1865. Another is the [irresistible impulse]? test - a person may know that an act is wrong, but because of mental illness cannot control their actions. The Durham test (1955) staes that "An accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect". Defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity are only rarely freed. They are usually confined to a mental institution and defendants can often spend more time there they would have in prison had they been convicted. |
|
The concept has existed since ancient Greece and Rome, being re-codifed across the centuries, the first full transcipt for an insanity trial dates from 1724. But despite the antiquity of the concept the insanity defense is still open to controversy and defendants rarely enter such pleas. The problems centre around the definition of insanity in the criminal law context. Legal definitions are repeatedly refined through cases - but a popular definition is the McNaghten rules which define insanity as "the inability to distinguish right from wrong." It dates from England, 1844 (based on a 1843 trial) and was first applied in the US in 1865. Another is the [irresistible impulse]? test - a person may know that an act is wrong, but because of mental illness cannot control their actions. The Durham test (1955) staes that "An accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect". After the 1970's, jurisdictions within the United States have moved tended to away from the Durham test partly because this test puts too much emphasis on the opinions of psychiatric experts. |
|
Defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity are generally placed in a mental institution. Unlikely defendants who are found guilty of a crime, they are not institutionalized for a fixed period, but rather they are held in the institution until medical and legal authorities determine that they are no longer a danger to themselves or others. This is a difficult determination to make, and because there is an extreme public reaction if someone is incorrectly released while there is little public reaction if someone who is safe is held in the institution, authorities making this decision tend to be extremely cautious. As a result, defendants are can often spend more time there they would have in prison had they been convicted. |
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)