Evaluation Of Insanity

Question 1

Definition of insanity

Answer 1

The definition was set out in M’Naughten rules in 1843

Little medical knowledge at that time

We have a greater knowledge now and should update the definition

Question 2

Proof of insanity

Answer 2

D has to prove HE is insane on THE BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES

This conflicts with the principle that the BOP should be on the prosecution and the D is innocent until proven guilty (Art 6 ECHR)

Furthermore it is inappropriate for the jury to decide whether someone is insane and that it should be left to medical experts

Question 3

Overlap with automatism

Answer 3

It is necessary to decide whether D’s automatic state is due to a mental illness or due to external factors

The courts have ruled that those suffering from any illness (mental or physical) which affects their mind puts them into an automatic state amounts to insanity

This means the defence of automatism has been removed from people with diabetes or epilepsy

This has serious consequences as, those who successfully use the defence of automatism are entitled to a complete acquittal- whereas on a finding of guilty by reason of insanity the judge imposes some orderl

Question 4

Ineffectiveness of the verdict

Answer 4

A finding of insanity can mean an indefinite stay in a secure mental hospital,

whereas if D pleads guilty he will be given a specific sentence

Even where there is a mandatory life sentence he will receive a minimum tariff

Therefore given a choice D will plead guilty and receive a conviction

Also the social stigma attached to being labelled insane deters people from using the defence