Insanity Flashcards
where in statute is it defined who can use insanity and what does it say?
- Section 2 Criminal Procedures Act 1991
- States an accused may be unfit to plead where it is established that due to his mental condition he is unable to understand the charge before him.
Why would someone not necessarily want to plead NGRI?
- Because they may be forced to under go hospital treatment
- Sometimes the hospital admission ends up being longer than the sentence might have been so not really worth it.
When did rules on insanity change and what was the consequence?
- Changed in the early 1990’s
- When someone pleads NGRI the judge now has discretion to impose a hospital order, discharge or a supervision order.
R v M’naghten 1843
- The D attempted to assassinate the Prime Minister and he thought he was plotting against him.
- He was suffering from morbid delusions and persecutions syndrome and instead shot Pm’s secretary.
- Was committed to hospital for NGRI
- Created the M’naghten rules
What are the M’naghten rules (Rebuttable presumption?)
- They are rules created in 1843 that have been followed ever since
- Stated that the jury should be directed that every man is presumed sane until the contrary is proved to their satisfaction.
- AND that to establish a defence the party accused must at the time have been labouring under a defect of reason, from a disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing
- OR that he did not know what he was doing was wrong
R v Sullivan 1993
- Was proved and decided in this case that the M’naghten rules are now law
What are the 4 criteria to prove insanity?
- Defect of reason
- Disease of the mind
- Not knowing the nature and quality of the act
- Did not know the act he did was wrong
Simester and Sullivan 2016
- Showed that a defect of reason does morally allow for the person not to be held responsible for actions.
- ’ If under the influence of drink or drugs D believes she can execute some dangerous manoeuvre, we may,hold them morally responsible for any harm that follows’
- BUT ‘ should the same belief arise from schizophrenia or delusions talk or moral responsibility would seem to miss the mark
How is a disease of the mind determined?
- It is a legal question, NOT MEDICAL
Kemp 1957
- Killed his wife but had a condition that cut of blood supply to his brain
- Was decided that 2 medical experts must give evidence of the individuals frame of mind.
- It is then for the judge to apply this evidence to create the decision
What is an internal state of mind and what is an external state of mind?
- Internal is insanity
- External is usually automatism
Hennessey 1989
- D was diabetic who failed to take insulin and became hypoglycemic
- Committed a crime with internal state of mind
Quick 1973
- D was a diabetic who took too much insulin
- As he took too much that meant it was an external cause and therefore could not use insanity defence
R v Rabey 1997
- Internal and External reasoning were heavily criticised in this case
- Showing they can be controversial
R v Coley 2013
- D was self-induced and believed he was in a video game and stabbed his neighbour
- Was deemed to be voluntary intoxicated and so could not claim insanity
