Civil And Crimianl Commitement Flashcards
Civil and Criminal Commitment
In canada NCRMD.
Different states have different rules
Mixed views
Rey controversial
Man had psychotic break- killed someone’s, had schizophrenia
In psychosis
Went to court, found not guilty= now civilly committed
Have to decide if danger to others
In for a year- responding well to medication
Billy Milligan- first to successfully use dissociative identity to overcome serious charge
Most controversial see it the least and ppl make it up= hill side strangler
Icogentic- physician inflened this diagnosis
Iatrogenic.
Biggest isssue- anecdotal cases of evidence where one needs glasses bu the other [ersonalities don’t-how
Have no explanation= ignore it
Criminal commitment
Bobby’s story
Down’s Syndrome - IQ below 50 (severely retarded)
25 years old, 6’4’’, 300 pounds
Has recently become sexually mature
Acting out his sexual urges violently against women
Recently charged with sexual assault
Criminal commitment= charged with crime sbut didn’t know what you were doing
Give case- not usual or common
Bobby-
Down syndrome- cognitively impaired, lack of dvelopement- cant take care o himself
Lives with his elderly parents
He is very strong
Delayed hysical maturation so now at 25- yearns for sexual contact- while going grocery shopping- grabs women’s breast and hugs her- has an erection= she is traumatized and calls the police
She wants him charged= feels he is a danger
Get him a lawyer-
Fitness to stand trial
“An accused individual must be protected from a conviction that could have resulted from a lack of participation or capacity to make proper judgment”
R. v. Pritchard
Accused must be able to assist in his or her defence
Does the accused understand his or her role in the proceedings
Does the accused understand the nature or object of the proceedings
Can bobby stand trial
Is he fit to stand trial
Prichard= common law
1- variable, subjective, judge makes that decision- not psychologist, hires one to advise their decision- judge can still make own decision
Advisor- only gives opinion doesn’t rener decision
2- what can you explain and what they have o do- what level can they understand it- he can but need to explain in it way that he can show his. Understanding- winde open tooo broad
Fitness to Stand Trial statutory law
section 2 of the Criminal Code
Unfit to stand trial means unable on account of mental disorder to conduct a defence at any stage of the proceedings before a verdict is rendered or to instruct counsel to do so, and, in particular, unable on account of mental disorder to
Understand the nature or object of the proceedings
Understand the possible consequences of the proceedings, or
Communicate with counsel
Common law was too vague- statutory law fixes it
What is mental disorder?- what do we use to diagnose- concussion?drugs?
Understand meaning of mental disorder over time- case t case
Usually fairly routine
Cant judge fitness after verdict
A- matches 3rd commmon law= defining feature
B,c give support for understanding and how to practically apply it
B- tell him what happened, know consequences, put it in terms they can understand
C- can someone as I’m a question and he can answer in best interest of self- shady grounds= tell Ruth or do best interest
Fitness to stand trial
An accused is presumed fit to stand trial unless the court is satisfied on a balance of probabilities that he or she us unfit (s.672.22)
The party raising the issue has the burden of proving the issue of unfitness (s. 672.23)
R. v. Taylor – “limited cognitive capacity”
The accused need only have the ability to recount to his or her lawyer the facts relating to the offence that would enable the lawyer to properly present the case. The accused need not have the ability to act in his or her own best interest.
Default- prosecution needs to prove- defence has to prove finess(if raise it)
Taylor- standard of limited cognitive capacity- bare minimum to be fit to stand trial
What happens if unfit to stand trial
if unfit to stand trial, there are 3 options
Conditional discharge
A detention order - bail is denied and you are committed to a hospital for the criminally insane until found competent
A treatment order – treated until fit to stand trial
If determined you will never be competent, you must be released or civil commitment proceedings are initiated
Bobby.is fit to stand trial
1- let you out with some conditions- for lesser crimes- stay on meds, don’t go near guns, alcohol- any relevant conditions
Violation= another disposition= need r done for violet ffenses – not for bobby
2- no bail, committed to hospital till found competent
Mike jones=
Has paranoid schizo- caught for shoplifting food- he’s homeless- deny bail and a year later finds him it to stand trial found- NCRMD- found a danger to others- goes to mental institution- 17 months later-
Goes to Supreme Court- max fine for hoplifting= 1 year,, but not incarcerated bc of crime- he is a danger to theirs- civil commitment= civil is important – can be civilly committed without committing a crime
3- treat till fit to stand for trial- do everything can to stand trial
Have state act as parent- person cant make best decisio for self
Fitness Interview Test
Nature and object of the proceedings: the arrest process, the nature and severity of the charges, the role of key players, pleas available, consequences of pleas, court procedure
Understanding of the consequences: range and nature of penalties, available legal defences and the likely outcome
Ability to communicate with lawyer: capacity to communicate facts, relate to lawyer, engage in defence, challenge witnesses, testify, and manage courtroom behaviour
Judges aren’t qualified to determine fitness- trying to understand state of mind
Psychiatrist-makes decision
1- what you need` to know
Understand who lawyers are and their role,
Profile of Unfitness
Single, unemployed men, living alone
History of psychiatric problems and previous psychiatric hospitalizations
Mostly charged with property offences and other non-violent offences
Demographic, criminological, mental disorder
Most people found unfit will spend more time incarcerated than if they were found guilty and served the maximum sentence
On and off meication
Schizophrenia- don’t know ur delusional- think who ever brings it up is delusional
Don’t hrt others, not huge danger to society
Been charged with petty crimes
Have diagnosible mental illness- often psychosis- schizophrenia, bipolar
Insanity
Borrowed term from common parlance developed into a legal concept.
The challenge for the prosecutor is to ensure the common concept of insanity does not invade the legal concept.
Bobby is at trial- NCRMD- defence
Insane doesn’t= crazy
Jeffry dalhmer not insane
Insanity is not a medical term
Insanity- ability to understand and appreciate behaviour
It is a legal term
Insanity Prior to M’Naughten
in ancient Hebrew law children and the insane were not held responsible for their acts.
In 1265, Bracton set forth the first explicit standard “an insane person is a person who does not know what he is doing, is lacking in mind and reason, and is not far removed from brutes.”
in ancient Hebrew law children and the insane were not held responsible for their acts.
In 1265, Bracton set forth the first explicit standard “an insane person is a person who does not know what he is doing, is lacking in mind and reason, and is not far removed from brutes.”Thousands of years ag- understand can not be guilty bc of mental disorder
Braxton- subjective
Wild Beast
(1724) …”totally deprived of his understanding and memory, and . . . not know what he is doing, no more than an infant, than a brute, or a wild beast.”
Lord Hale (1736) “total defect of understanding” – less than a child of 14
M’Naughten case (1843)
Daniel M’Naughten wanted to kill the Prime Minister Peel but mistakenly killed Peel’s secretary Edward Drummond.
M’Naughten was acquitted after nine medical experts testified to his insanity.
Schizophrenic
Believes he needs to kill England prime minister- god has told him it will bring rapture- Jesus brings good souls to heaven before battle
Found insane= not guilty
Queen Victoria was openly angry about the verdict and complained about a legal system that would allow an NGRI verdict for Hadfield (1800) and M’Naughten “whilst everybody is morally convinced that both malefactors were perfectly conscious and aware of what they did.”
Canadian Criminal Commitment
M’Naghten rules – common law (English)
“A person is presumed sane unless it can be clearly proven that , at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring 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 he was doing what was wrong.”
Have to prove insane
Didn’t kow what they were doing or didn’t know it was wrong
Mental Disorder & Capacity
Cdn. Criminal Justice is based on the principle that individuals are responsible for their acts.
those who choose to disobey are subject to punishment.
ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
Section 16 Criminal Code of Canada (CCC)
the law does exempt criminal responsibility for those who are incapable of making a rational choice.
the M’Naughten Rules, with modest variations, found their way into the Canadian Criminal Code.
Deals with insanity sections
