Insanity Flashcards
What crimes can you have a defence for insanity?
All crimes.
What happens when a plea of insanity is successful?
Jury returns a special verdict of ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’.
What is the 1991 act regarding insanity?
Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to plead) Act 1991
What did the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to plead) Act 1991 say?
Successful plea results in compulsory detention in mental hospital, for murder it was indefinitely until released on authority of Home Secretary.
What was the 1991 Act replaced by?
Domestic Violence Crime and Victims Act 2004
What does the Domestic Violence Crime and Victims Act 2004 say?
Judge can make: A Hospital Order, a Supervision Order or an absolute Discharge.
What is the burden of proof of insanity?
D must prove insanity on a balance of probabilities.
What is Automatism?
Separate defence to insanity. Describes a state of unconsciousness.
Where was Automatism defined?
Bratty v Attorney General for N.Ireland (1963) – “an act done by the muscles, without control of the mind; or an act done by a person who is not conscious.”
What happens when a plea of insanity is successful?
Results in an acquittal.
Where are the rules of insanity laid out?
M’Naghten (1843)
What happened in M’Naghten (1843)?
Tried to kill someone, killed secretary by mistake.
What is the legal principle in M’Naghten (1843)?
Court acquitted on grounds of insanity. HoL said there’s a general presumption everyone is sane, but it can be rebutted.
What must be established at the time of the offence for the D to be able to plead insanity?
D was suffering from:
• A defect of reason
• Caused by a disease of the mind
• So D did not know what they were doing OR they did not know what they were doing was wrong.
What does a Defect of Reason mean?
Complete loss of reasoning power. Failing to use reasoning powers is insufficient.
What is the case associated with a defect of reason?
R v Clarke (1972) CA
What happened in R v Clarke (1972) CA?
D charged with stealing. Argued she had been acting absentmindedly due to depression and diabetes.
What is the legal principle in R v Clarke (1972) CA?
Judge ruled insanity was appropriate. Court ruled she was not deprived of her reasoning power and quashed conviction.
What does it mean by being caused by a disease of the mind?
Legal not medical term, means a malfunctioning of the mind, not confined to diseases of the brain alone.
What is the case associated with the defect of reason being caused by a disease of the mind?
R v Kemp (1957)
What happened in R v Kemp (1957)?
D suffered from arteriosclerosis which caused temporary blackouts. During which he attacked his wife. Found not guilty by reason of insanity.
What is the legal principle in R v Kemp (1957)?
Said there was no distinction between a disease of the mind and a disease of the body affecting the mind.
What are the two main judicial theories?
The continuing danger theory.
The internal cause/factor or external cause/factor.
What is the continuing danger theory?
Is the D still a danger to the public? Are they likely to be violent?
What two cases are associated with the continuing danger theory?
Bratty v Attorney General for Northern Ireland (1963) HL
R v Sullivan (1984) HL
What happened in Bratty v Attorney General for Northern Ireland (1963) HL?
D strangled girl during epileptic seizure.
What is the legal principle in Bratty v Attorney General for Northern Ireland (1963) HL?
Trial judge said insanity was appropriate, Lord Denning said “any mental disorder which has manifested itself in violence and is prone to recur is a disease of the mind”.
What happened in R v Sullivan (1984) HL?
D kicked and injured friend whilst having a seizure.
What is the legal principle in R v Sullivan (1984) HL?
D pleaded automatism, judge ruled insanity was more appropriate.
What is the internal/external factor theory?
Decided that if malfunctioning caused by an internal source, correct defence is insanity, if due to external source, correct defence is automatism.
What are the three cases associated with internal/external factor theory?
R v Quick (1973)
R v Hennessy (1989)
R v Burgess (1991)
What happened in R v Quick (1973)?
D didn’t eat after taking insulin and attacked a patient – hypoglycaemic.
What is the legal principle in R v Quick (1973)?
External factor caused attack so on appeal court ruled automatism should have been allowed.
What happened in R v Hennessy (1989)?
D didn’t take insulin and drove whilst disqualified – hyperglycaemia.
What is the legal principle in R v Hennessy (1989)?
It was due to an internal cause so trial judge was correct to use insanity.
What happened in R v Burgess (1991)?
Fell asleep and attacked friend.
What is the legal principle in R v Burgess (1991)?
Trial judge said appropriate defence was insanity due to it being caused by an internal factor.
What case is associated with the nature and quality of the act?
Codere (1916)
What happened in Codere (1916)?
Man cut wife’s throat thinking it was a loaf of bread.
What is the legal principle in Codere (1916)?
Means the physical rather than the moral nature of the act.
What does ‘knowledge that the act was wrong’ mean?
Legally wrong not morally wrong.
What two cases are associated with knowledge that the act was wrong?
R v Windle (1952)
R v Johnson (2007)
What happened in R v Windle (1952)?
D helped suicidal wife to overdose.
What is the legal principle in R v Windle (1952)?
Despite suffering from mental illness, he knew poisoning his wife was legally wrong. Rejected plea of insanity.
What happened in R v Johnson (2007)?
Schizophrenic D stabled neighbour.
What is the legal principle in R v Johnson (2007)?
Knew what he did was legally wrong, CoA said insanity was not available to him.
Evaluate the defence of insanity.
Definition of insanity is outdated.
Legal definition, not a medical one.
No verdict of partially insane.
Lack reliable means of telling if D was insane at time of offence.
Objectionable that the label and stigma of insanity is applied to someone who acted during a hyperglycaemic attack or sleepwalking.
Internal/external factor theory is harsh and absurd.
