Billy Joe Harris Research Paper

People who are against this, think that this plea is an tactic the lawyers use to get their clients less time in jail, or inclusively get them into a better place such as a mental hospital. I understand that they think this way because there has been cases where it has been done with those intentions. However, we need to understand that psychiatrists knowledge is not the same, it is more advanced. In addition, we need to know that lawyers will not determine if the person was insane, but only claim him to be. It is all up to the psychiatrists who will examine the accused who will undergo many test that will determine him insane in the time of the crime scene. Fersh, the author of “Thinking of the Insanity Defense” stated in his book that, “ The American Psychological Association is primarily interested in providing empirical research to serve as a basis for informed public decisions, assisting the judge and jury in making legal, scientific and moral determinations, and ensuring appropriate treatment for mentally impaired offenders. The APA supports the insanity defense and believes that all mentally impaired defendants, regardless of guilt or innocence, deserve sufficient treatment following the verdict, especially if they pose a threat to themselves or others. The organization is greatly concerned over the issue of releasing dangerous individuals to society after inadequate treatment and would like to provide

Do you think it is right for a person to murder someone and say that they did it because they are mentally ill? It is wrong for a person to get out of their punishment for their action by using the insanity plea. If someone commits a crime and has no previous record of being insane, how could they become mentally ill? The only reason people use the insanity plea is to get off the hook for committing a crime. The insanity defense plea is probably one of the most controversial of all the criminal defense strategies, and at the same time is one of the most used. In many cases, when it has been used, it has tended to cause public debate. Opinion polls indicate that 90 percent of the public believes the insanity defense is overused and a ticket to freedom (Maier, 1998). The insanity defense plea is split into two types; one being not guilty by mental disease or defect and not competent to stand trial (“Criminal Defenses”).  The insanity defense plea should not be used in a capital murder case, unless a previously diagnosed mental illness is recorded.

Insanity, by its dictionary definition, is the derangement of the mind. (Dictionary.com) It is used in everyday contexts, when people say “You are insane for doing that trick on your dirt bike ” or “ The traffic getting out of the game was insane last night!”. However the real definition, written by Cornell University Law School states that “A person accused of a crime can acknowledge that they committed the crime, but argue that they are not responsible for it because of their mental illness, by pleading "not guilty by reason of insanity." The insanity defense is traditionally classified as an excuse defense, in contrast with justification defenses like self-defense. This classification

There are a few different types of insanity pleas in the court of law; however, just because someone pleads insane will try actually be found insane. About half of the states follow the "M 'Naughten" rule, based on the 1843 British case of Daniel M 'Naughten, a deranged woodcutter who attempted to assassinate the prime minister. He was acquitted, and the resulting standard is still used in 26 states in the U.S.: A defendant may be found not guilty by reason of insanity if "at the time of committing the act, he was laboring under such a defect of reason from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know what he was doing was wrong." (emphasis added) This test

The first criminal defense is pleading insanity which is an affirmative defense. Insanity is a “legal term rather than a medical one, and indicates a condition that renders the affected person incapable of rational thought, thereby removing criminal culpability” (Pollock, 2013). This means that a defendant is not responsible for their actions due to having mental health issues. If a defendant pleads guilty to a crime, but is found to be legally insane; they will still serve their sentence but with a lesser severe punishment. Once a defendant pleads insanity, they are often required to have a mental examination. When a defendant is in a court of law, they may claim that they were as mentally impaired with illness as to be “insane” at the time that they were committing the illegal act (Pollock, 2013). However, when pleading insanity it can also create issues by being used in a criminal proceeding.

The Insanity defense is mentioned as confusing to the psychiatric and legal concept. Furthermore, it is explained that the word “insane” is more of a legal word, then a medical term, and therefor to prove a person or a criminal insane, one must find the mental condition, of a criminal, severely impaired to the point of losing one’s free will. A psychiatrist may be or may not able to determine such illness, and a jury’s decision solely based on a psychiatrists’ opinion may be grounded on unreliable evidence. Retrieved from; West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2 (2008).

The ideological concept of an insanity defense, formerly termed “complete madness,” was originally incorporated into the English common-law jurisprudence system in the late thirteenth century of the United Kingdom as an affirmative defense for defendants under the yoke of criminal charges involving a heinous action which could involve the option of termination of a defendant’s life if adjudge guilty of such act (Hill). Through such incorporation of a legal defense, the institution of a new societal grouping known commonly as the “criminally insane” became expounded, as well as, the legal opportunity allowing for self-declaration of being “innocent by reason of mental illness or defect”(or, the insanity defense). Those criminally insane are a subset of the prison population who have been deemed to have committed their crimes under the influence of a mental disease/disorder, or who were not in a condition of intellect during the time of the crime to comprehend the illegality or immorality of their offense (Frontline). Only if the defendant has plead insanity before the court can they be considered a truly criminally insane inmate. There are manifold condemnations sustained by the judicial system ranging from guilty but insane to not guilty by reason of insanity, as well as the legal states of incompetency and diminished capacity. This distinction has become a substance of federal law, but as soon as a defendant is convicted, the treatment of the convicted individual is left

The above-mentioned case of John Hinckley jr. Who attempted to assassinate President Reagan, illustrates the insanity defense which uses different rules depending on the jurisdiction. In its purest form the insanity defense relieves the defendant of all criminal responsibility for their actions. This does not mean the defendant avoids any consequences for their actions. independent found not guilty by reason of insanity is usually confined to a psychiatric facility for treatment to address their mental illness.If the crime committed was of a violent nature, the patient will be confined to a high-security psychiatric facility which resemble prisons in many ways. Additionally, a defendant found not guilty by reason of insanity will often be confined for a longer Time then they would have if

The word insane is a legal term. Because research has identified many different mental illnesses of varying severities, it is now too simplistic to describe a severely mentally ill person merely as insane. The federal law states that insanity is a fair defense if " at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendants as a result of sever mental disease or defect was unable to appreciate the nature and quality of the wrongfulness of his acts"(Knowles). The American

The insanity plea is a very rare but very often used plea in court. Many people try to get away with their crimes by pleading not guilty for reason of insanity but very rarely do people get by with it. There have been many tests and rules made since the insanity plea became a common thing. With every test, people would find loop holes and way through the system. The test we currently use is very specific and very hard to pass by and that is why so many people cannot plead guilty for reason of insanity.

The insanity plea has existed since 1724. For the defense being reserved in the United States law system, there ought to be a benefit to it. The justification for having a plea such as this is to assure that the person in question receives equitable judgement and punishment (Insanity, Wikipedia). But there are still numerous questions based on the genuinity of the plea, itself. On March 30, 1981, John Hinckley shot president Ronald Reagan in an attempt to assassinate him (Insanity, Person). When brought to trial, he pleaded insanity.

Each state, and the District of Columbia, has its own statute outlining the standard for determining whether a defendant is legally insane, therefore not responsible, at the time the crime is committed.

The insanity defense has been a controversial subject for years, as it touches some sensitive topics pertaining to mental illness. In many cases the insanity defense is presented as a defense mechanism and many times an excuse. The defense will argue that the defendant is not responsible for their actions due to an irregular act at the time of the crime. “Even when the prosecution has met this burden of proof, the insanity defense serves as an affirmative defense for the defendant,” (Grachek, 2006). Currently there are four forms of the insanity defense which presently exist:M ’Naghten, irresistible impulse, substantial capacity, and Durham. M’ Naghten insanity defense also called the right-wrong test, for the reason that it is cognitive and focuses on the offender’s

"Insanity is defined as a mental disorder of such severity as to render its victim incapable of managing his affairs or conforming to social standards." (Insanity, pg. 1) It is used in court to state that the defendant was not aware of what he/she was doing at the time of the crime, due to mental illnesses. But insanity is a legal, not a medical, definition. There is a difference between mental illness and going insane. Many problems are raised by the existence of the insanity defense. For example, determining the patient's true mental illness (whether they are faking or not), placement of the mentally ill after trial, the credibility of the psychological experts, the percentage of cases that are actually successful,

The medical definition of insanity differs completely from the legal aspect. The medical definition of insanity is, as The Free Dictionary defines “a medically obsolete term for mental derangement or disorder.” There is no mention of criminal activity or lack of responsibility