Insanity Plea Defense Essay

After close review and careful analysis of the case of Andrea Yates and the circumstances which led to the drowning death and murder of her five children, I first would like to state my personal opinion on the conclusion of the case which was the majority consensus at the time of her trial and sentencing. She was guilty of a horrible murder and although certainly had mental problems, which is apparent by her actions that most completely rational thinking human being and mother would be incapable of committing, and expertly

Casey Anthony was put on trial for murder on May 24, 2011. The trial lasted six weeks, from May to July 2011. Prosecutors were seeking to give Casey Anthony the death penalty and allegedly claimed that Casey murdered her daughter so she would not have any parental responsibilities for the child. By managing chloroform and applying duct tape onto the child’s mouth, Casey Anthony murdered her own baby. Casey Anthony’s defense team tried to argue against the charges by claiming that the child had drowned on accident in the family's swimming pool on June 16, 2008. The defense contended that Casey lied about this, along with many other issues, because of a dysfunctional childhood. They claimed that she had endured sexual abuse by her father. Casey Anthony’s defense did not present any evidence however on how Caylee died, or any evidence that claimed that Casey was sexually abused as a child, but yet they still challenged every piece of the prosecution's evidence. During her trial; Casey did not testify.

In 2001, Andrea Yates drowned her five children in a bathtub in her home. This was very disturbing news. I am a native Houstonian. I was at home that day. The television was on and will never forget the news breaking announcements that broke the story of a homicide in Clear Lake. All the information the reporters had was a mother killed all her children then called the police to report it. The full story and the details that lead to this tragedy did not unfold until years later. It was sad because as details unfolded if Andrea Yates had been treated properly and followed her doctors

According to Psychology Today (2012), the insanity defense is defined as an individual who is being charged of a crime that can recognize that he or she committed the crime, but argues that they are not responsible for it because of their mental breakdown during the crime, by pleading "not guilty by reason of insanity.” While this defense is considered to be a legal strategy, it can also be seen as an indication of what society may believe; “it reflects society 's belief that the law should not

Insanity- the state of being mentally ill. Could insanity be an excuse for an unforgivable crime? In the short story “The Tell Tale Heart” by Edgar Allen Poe, we come face to face with a man reliving his killing of an innocent man and learn the chilling state of mind the narrator has decreased to. It is clear he is mentally ill from the start of the story and it is constant throughout the text. The narrator is not guilty for reasons of insanity because he converses and argues with voices in his head, hears nonexistent sounds, and killed an innocent man because he believed his eye was haunting him. Some may claim that there is no excuse for murder, but this man is obviously mentally challenged, therefore should not be degraded any further

It is within my opinion, that the insanity defense is used over excessively and is taking part in almost every defense to any crime. Offenders seem to have the knowledge to the use of this defense and will often provide a plea to guilty by insanity or temporary insanity, within the faith, to receive a reduced sentence. While insanity has to be a proven fact and a

Over the years the standards and requirements for the insanity plea have changed, from strict to lenient back to strict and so on. The insanity defense is not something that can just be used at will, and instantly believed. It must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that at the time the crime was committed, the offender was incapable of discerning right from wrong.

The history of the insanity plea is highly extensive. The highly controversial plea has given serial killers, rapists, and criminals the opportunity to get a reduced sentence if they prove that they are not mentally stable. The insanity plea has been around longer than some people may think, dating all the way back to the Roman Empire. Some of the current tests that determine if someone is legally insane are the M’Naghten Rule and the Model Penal Code. People who would take these tests are well known killers, such as Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne Gacy.

Weeks before the call, the vehicle Casey had been driving was found abandoned. The tow truck driver who found the vehicle told officers that the vehicle had a smell as if something had been decomposing. The tow truck driver compared the smell to a similar situation where he found an abandoned truck with a dead man’s body laying inside. Along with the horrible smell inside the vehicle; hair and a black plastic bag were found in the trunk of the car. Also found was what it seemed to be blood. On July 16 Casey Anthony was charged with first-degree murder, child neglect, aggravated child abuse and four counts of lying to detectives. On December 11, 2008 Caylee’s body was found wrapped inside a plastic bag, her body was decomposed and her skull only

The insanity defense dates back to 1843. A man named Daniel McNaughtan tried to assassinate British Prime Minister Robert Peel. He attempted to kill the prime minister and successfully killed the prime ministers secretary. When brought to court he pleads not guilty by reason of insanity. He was found not guilty by reasons of insanity. The U.S criminal justice system adopted this legal procedure that now is established. The insanity plea has been used for the past one hundred and fifty years.

The problem with this defense is that insanity here is either examined from a legal angle or a psychoanalytical one which involves talking to people and having them take tests. There is however, no scientific proof confirming the causal relationship between mental illness and criminal behavior based on a deeper neurological working of the brain sciences. The psychiatrist finds himself/herself in a double bind where with no clear medical definition of mental illness, he/she must answer questions of legal insanity- beliefs of human rationality, and free will instead of basing it on more concrete scientific facts. Let me use a case study to elaborate my argument that law in this country continues to regard insanity as a moral and legal matter rather than ones based on scientific analysis.

In criminal cases where an insanity defense is used, the defense must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not responsible for his or her actions during a mental health breakdown. There are two forms of an insanity defense, cognitive and volitional. In order for an individual to meet the requirements for cognitive insanity it must be proven that the defendant had to be so impaired by a mental disease at the time of the act that they did not know the nature of what they were doing. If they are fully aware of their actions, one must prove that they didn’t know what they were doing was wrong. Volitional insanity, also known as irresistible impulse, states that the defendant is able to differentiate between right or wrong at the time, but suffered from a mental disease that made them unable to control themselves. Volitional insanity is common in crimes of vengeance, where very few states allow the use of this defense. The insanity defense should not be confused with incompetency. In incompetency cases, the individual is not able to understand the nature and consequences of the case, nor adequately able to help an attorney with his or her defense. The insanity defense reflects the approach that an individual who can’t acknowledge the consequences of their actions should not be punished for the crime. In most jurisdictions a professional is bought in to determine if the defendant was not able to differentiate between right or wrong at the time of the

"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,

I think that using insanity as a defense for a crime is acceptable. The burden of proof should lie on the defendant to prove his case. Although I do not think a person found to be insane should be set free. A guilty but mentally ill verdict should be applied as it is done by other states. Under the GBMI verdict, the defendant is sentence the same as if her or she is guilty. This will allow for treatment till the defendant is deemed cured and can serve the rest of their sentence in prison. I do think that California should still use the M’Naghten Rule but by applying the GBMI verdict will help in removing dangerous people from the street. We may also benefit with the addition of the Irresistible Impulse Test. This will help to narrow down

was truly crazy or not. Although, there are many deliberate acts of fabricated insanity repeated