There Are A Few Different Types Of Insanity Pleas In The

There were several components of the trial that proved to me that James Broadnax was indeed guilty first degree murder. One defining portion of the literature was when James essentially stated he has robbed an individual. I tried to keep myself from creating assumptions and giving the benefit of the doubt due to the gravity of the situation. However, I came to believe he was indeed guilty. Another event was when he was interviewed by news reported on his recollection of the events. His responses showed no remorse whatsoever and showed no regard for human life. In regards to the effectiveness of his council, I believe Mr. Lollar was relatively effective. There were some areas of the trial phase that I felt should have gone

A significant and controversial issue within the legal system is the ‘insanity defense’ in which during a criminal trial, the defendant will make a claim that they are not guilty by reason of insanity, or in other words, they have deficient and impaired cognitive and mental capabilities. These mental health problems associated with insanity are caused by psychopathological disorders, which may have led to their dysfunction. What separates this from a regular plead of ‘diminished capacity’ is that a plea of insanity is a full defense rather than just a partial defense (Legal information institute, n.d.). With the diminished capacity defense, the defendant’s mental competence is still the focus, although they are pleading to a lesser crime

While there are valid arguments for the insanity plea, the negative consequences outweigh any positive potential. Science, research, and court court cases prove that every individual should be held responsible for his or her actions despite one’s mental state. People always commit crimes for a purpose and a reason whether intended or unintended, known or unknown. Every single individual who has ever committed a crime has had a motive for his or her actions. There is always a driving force or emotion that pushes someone to act or react in a certain way. Right and wrong is basic human knowledge. If an individual has the ability to kill, to rape, or to beat another human being, then they have the ability to know their actions and know how those actions affect others. Fox News commentator Charles Krauthammer made this observation regarding the insanity plea: “It is absurd to permit the heinousness of a crime to become self-acquitting. That sets up a perverse standard: the more terrible the crime, the crazier, therefore the less culpable the criminal. The man who commits incomprehensible torture is acquitted. The father who steals bread to feed his children is convicted” (qtd. in “So Guilty They’re Innocent”). Furthermore, if someone has the ability to kill, to rape, or to beat, then they have the ability to be incarcerated and held responsible for their

Only .85 percent of cases include an insanity plea and only 25 percent are successful in receiving a non guilty verdict. When psychiatric results are removed from the equation, the most likely reason why someone will be found not guilty of a crime by insanity it is because of the schizophrenia diagnosis. The modern insanity plea is built upon 1984 legislation that was passed after the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan. In the controversial court case of the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan, the innocent verdict correctly acquitted him on the count of his insanity and depression combined with his unhealthy obsession with the movie, Taxi Driver, and one of it’s stars, Jodie Foster. His legal insanity and depression caused him to

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

The insanity defense, used when a defendant commits a crime but is mentally incapable of understanding the consequence of his actions, is a controversial plea that has been in existence for several centuries. The insanity defense uses the idea that the defendant committed the crime, but due to the lack of mental instability, was unable to understand that their actions are wrong. The insanity defense dates back to the 19th century. Daniel M’Naghten was a woodworker who thought that he was a target of a conspiracy with the pope and the British Prime Minister, Robert Peel.

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.

A rule that still plays a part in many state 's insanity rulings today is the M 'Naghten Rule. This ruling from a case in 1843 looks at a person 's cognitive ability to determine sanity. It is sometimes known as the cognitive test of insanity (Fulero & Wrightsman, 2005). A person must not have known "the nature and quality of the act [they] were

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

For years, the insanity defense has developed and turned into a difficult but sometime successful defense system in a court of law. The exact law changes from state to state however the main idea remains the same. The insanity defense could apply or be used on a person who is considered legally insane. They must have a severe mental disease or defect and must prove they were at the time of the crime, legally insane. Also said person has to prove they didn’t know the impact, quality or the nature of their act or acts (The Insanity).

The insanity defense is a very complex criminal defense plea. Over hundreds of years, the insanity defense has evolved. The correct term for the insanity defense in a criminal case will be “not guilty by reasons of insanity” (NGRI). Many people have used the insanity defense without success. When someone uses the NGRI defense it is argued that a mental illness took full effect leading to an individual to commit a criminal act. Many have tried to use such a defense, yet one after another they have failed. The insanity defense is one of the hardest, if not the hardest defense to use. Pleading insanity can be tricky. One cannot simply plead insanity and expect for it to work.

There are a lot of courses of action that have to be taken when it comes to the plea. Regardless of all the processes that have to be done, it is better for a mentally ill defendant to seek this alibi. It is imperative for the accused to try to give a justification for their actions in order to avoid getting possible jail time. With the diagnosis of a mental health professional, they are able to provide verification of their mental illness. The insanity defense is the only defense that they are supplied with to defend their position in a case. According to the article, Insanity Defense: Proposals

Only a small percent of people use insanity defense.Only a very small number of people actually win about it.A lot of cases of insanity defense often turn out very wrong.The defendant is usually lying about being insane so he can have a smaller sentence.If they get caught lying they might get a boost on their sentence to jail.

According to one source (2011, Black’s Law, Bryan A. Garner) insanity is “Any mental disorder sever enough that it prevents a person from having legal capacity and excuses the person from criminal or civil responsibility, insanity is a legal, not a medical, standard.” Another source states “In order for one person to be considered for the insanity plea, they must have a psychiatric evaluation and prove they were insane during the committing of the crime.”(1965, Psychiatric Justice, Thomas S. Szasz, M.D) If someone pleads not guilty by reason of insanity, than they undergo mental rehabilitation. The length of time in the mental rehabilitation is determined by how long it takes the individual to be mentally prepared to re-appear in court. After the individual is fit for re-trial, the individual returns to court and will than plead guilty or not guilty. In most trials, the defendant serves a punishment that is not as severe as it was

The insanity defense “is traditionally classified as an excuse defense, in contrast with justification defenses like self-defense. This classification indicates