Insanity, duress of circumstances, duress Flashcards
what is insanity
- A full defence (acquitted of the crime committed), very rarely used and in many elements a complete reversal to most of the processes we see within the court system
what is a full defence
the person is not charged of the offence
what does insanity result in
- Does not result in an acquittal, but generally in some form of supervision or hospital order (often greater than the equivalent custodial)
who can raise insanity
prosecution and Judge, as well as defence
Viscount snaky- Woolmington cv DPP (1935)
you are considered sane unless proved other wise
“As regards Insanity, every accused is considered by law to be sane and accountable for his actions unless the contrary is proved.”
Viscount Sankey – Woolmington cv DPP (1935)
burden of proof
Within a usual criminal court, the burden of proof is on the prosecution and relies on ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ to establish the guilt of the D
insanity within the court
- Viscount Sankey’s quote raises some rather large differences between the standard of procedure in a normal court to the occurrences during a normal defence raised at trial
- Reverse Burden of Proof
insanity burden
- When the defence of insanity is raised, the standard shifts
- The remainder of the court case remains as standard
is insanity burden problematic
- The beyond reasonable doubt test is one of an evidentiary burden – all the defendant needs to do is to raise the question of ‘doubt’ in their defence
- However, a persuasive burden of proof – as seen in the burden for insanity means that they must show their claim to be more than likely not true
insanity must be proved how?
Insanity must be proved by the Defence as ‘on the balance of probabilities’ (51%)
3 areas where insanity might be raised in the CJS)
1) When the D is mentally disordered at the time of the offence – diminished responsibility or insanity defence
2) When D is mentally disordered at time of trial – fitness to plead
3) - D mentally disordered when convicted – MH dispositions
fitness to plead
whether the court think you are fit to plead
Mental dispositions
custody and community will not be appropriate for who got charged
controversy- why is insanity underused defence
requires multiple medical and psychological evidence to ensure that it is used correctly
controversy- two main arguments underpin the concept of insanity
- Medical v Legal definitions
- Public protection v deserved punishment?
where does the test of insanity originate from
M’Naghten Rules [1843] – note the time and slight difference in attitudes towards those with mental disorders
the test of insanity is very rarely used successfully which means…
lots of guilty pleased and prisons with very high population of mental disorders
the test of insanity
defendant must suffer from a disease of the mind, which caused
A defect of reason
The defect of reason caused a lack of responsibility, either because Defendant did not know the nature or quality of their act or they did not know it was wrong
disease of the mind is what sort of term
legal term not medical
disease of the mind
- Legal term, and not medical
- Kemp [1957]: hardening of the arteries had impact on reasoning ability
- No need for permanence
- Internal – disease of mind by psych or phys disease
- ## Can be curable
coley (2013)
- Very common that the line between voluntary intoxication and insanity may be blurred and difficult to differentiate due to the effect of some intoxicants
- ## It is not enough to use insanity where there was a defect of reason there must also be a disease of the mind which causes that defect
defect of reason
Must be deprived of the power of reasoning, which then causes a lack of responsibility
defect of reason - Clark (1972)
the defect of reason must be substantial – mere absent mindedness is not sufficient – generally considered to concern a more long term lapse of judgement
the defendant must be unaware of the nature or the quality of the act- considerations
- Did the D know what they were doing?
- Were they suffering from a delusion or unconsciousness?
- Largely focused on the concept of not having the MR of the offence charge
did the defendant know the act was wrong?
- This is not a question of morality, but one of facts and law
- The word ‘wrong’ means that it is contrary to the law – Windle [1952]
- Not that it was wrong in the eyes of a person
- If you know that what you are doing is wrong, then you ca
other defences - One (2013)
- The D can raise other offences alongside insanity, but Insanity will be applied first and then either accepted or removed
what happens if insanity is successful
- If a D is found to be ‘insane’ the jury will be directed to give a verdict of not guilty, by reason of insanity
- It used to be that this would automatically mean release to ‘secure accommodation’ with release only permitted by the home sec
current position
- Some offences do lead to automatic hospitalization or attendance in a secure setting (murder, for one)
- Has declined in use dramatically and the use of similar defences such as diminished responsibility and automatism have risen
who does the discretion fall under in this current position
the Judge who can under s.5 Criminal Procedure (insanity) Act 1964 decide the outcome for the Defendant