Criminal law is the body of law that establishes criminal offenses, governs the detention, accusation, and trial of suspects, and establishes the penalties for those found guilty. Modern criminal law has been significantly influenced by the different social sciences in areas such as sentencing, legal research, legislation and rehabilitation.
The Latin phrases; “Actus Non Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea”, which literally translates to “an act does not render a man guilty of a crime unless his mind is equally guilty” and “Furiosi nulla voluntas est,” which is translated to “a madman has no free will”. This implies that a person must both commit a crime and have the intention to do so in order to be held accountable.
As a result, a lot of criminals claim to be insane. The insanity defence has become a convenient excuse. In the eyes of the law, someone who lacks the capacity to distinguish between right and wrong cannot be guilty and should be found not guilty as they resemble a child who cannot distinguish between right and wrong. Thus, the defence of insanity spares the defendant from capital punishment or lengthy imprisonment, as it would be immoral to convict someone who does not understand what they are doing.
It is now vital to understand the psychology of criminals. Mens rea (guilty mind) and actus reus (guilty act) are the foundations of this defence. When claiming insanity, the defendant must demonstrate their lack of mental capacity or inability to form a mens rea. A person with a mental illness cannot have criminal intentions due to his or her mental state.
However, proving a mental illness on its own is insufficient to establish insanity. In order to successfully plead insanity, the defendant must be able to demonstrate that they were unable to distinguish between right and wrong at the time of the offense. In the process of proving insanity, a lot of time is taken up to convince the judges, which slows down the process of achieving justice. This can lead to abuse of the legal system.
Claiming insanity is more of an explanation for what the person did than it is an apology.
Types of insanity:
Permanent insanity or settled insanity is a condition caused by long-term substance abuse and differs from the temporary state of intoxication. Permanent insanity is often characterized by symptoms such as irrational and illogical thinking, impaired judgement, extreme mood swings, depression, and social withdrawal
Temporary insanity is in an occasional or temporary loss of consciousness. Characteristics of temporary insanity include confusion, disorientation, and aggression, schizophrenia or other types of temporary mental illnesses.
There are two possible consequences of this temporary madness: he is either “insane and therefore innocent” or “guilty but insane and therefore not a crime”.
It is important to distinguish between medical and legal insanity. Any person who has a mental illness of any kind is referred to as “medically insane,” but a person is regarded as legally insane if the mental illness causes a loss of reasoning power and cognitive function. In addition, the insanity had to exist at the time the incident occurred. The phrase “legal insanity” also refers solely to the “mental state” of the offender at the time of the crime. This has nothing to do with any of the different psychiatric diagnoses; it is purely a legal concept.
The concept of insanity has been in existence for many centuries. Even though Ancient Greece and Rome used this defence in their courts, it was only recognised as a defence to criminal charges in 1581 by English Legal Treatise when it was stated that “If a madman or a natural fool, or a lunatic in the time of his lunacy” kills someone, they cannot be held accountable. The British Courts developed different tests such as “Wild Beast Test” in 18th century, in which the defendants were not to be convicted if they understood the crime no better than “an infant, a brute, or a wild beast.”[1]
Various other tests were also developed to determine whether a person is legally crazy following this test, which provided the first formal basis for the law of insanity. These tests were; the Insane Delusion test, and the Good and Evil test (determines if the person who committed the crime has the ability to distinguish between good and evil). These different tests were the early laws relating to the Insanity Defence and laid the foundation for the legendary Mc-Naughton Test (This is also the basis of Section 84 of the Indian Penal code).
In 1843, Daniel Mc Naughten, shot and killed Edward Drummond mistaking him for Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel. Evidence was presented in court to demonstrate that he had been completely delusional about this matter for some time. The judge halted the trial after seven medical experts testified that Mc Naughten was totally insane, and Mc Naughten was then forcibly admitted to Bethlem Hospital. His plea of insanity caused the court to exonerate him.
This decision caused a significant uproar, there was discussion in the House of Lords during which a five-point proposal was put forth. The McNaughton’s rules were understood to be these five claims. The rules placed a strong emphasis on the evaluation of an accused person’s “understandability” in situations where they have committed a wrongdoing–It is an examination of one’s moral judgment.
The rules were as follows:
In 1954, the irresistible impulse test and the McNaughton tests validity was questioned. These tests were deemed to be fit again and were employed in addition to the Durham Rule (The product test). The two main components of the Durham rule:
1.The defendant must possess a mental disease. This judgement indicates to rely more on objective and psychological standards rather than Focusing on the defendant’s subjective cognition.
2.Only if the criminal act or behaviour is caused by the mental disease then the conduct should be exempted under the circumstances.[3]
The use of insanity as a defence has always been controversial because so many criminals wrongfully benefit from it, to the point where it is now seen more as an excuse than a defence of the facts and the crime. Due to this abuse, a number of nations have abolished this defence. It is logical to assume that insanity laws are no longer serving their original purpose and are being abused by criminals as a tool to get away with serious offences.
Criminals who deliberately manipulate the law to take advantage of the legal system are fully aware of their actions and the consequences of those actions. Additionally, they have a very clear motive for committing their crime, and as a result, they do it with the hope of getting away with it. One day, these perpetrators will eventually face consequences. In the meantime, it is necessary to take action to ensure that justice is served and that insanity laws are not used as a means of escaping punishment but rather as a means of ensuring that those who are found to be mentally unfit to stand trial do not have to bear the brunt of a criminal justice system that is not equipped to handle their mental state.
Reference:
Every society has some kind of stratification or group classification, where some groups are able…
The development of the self begins in the early stages of life and continues to…
Shiny object syndrome, or SOS, is a state of distraction created by the impression that…
Born in 1993, Stanley Milgram was an American psychologist best known for his study on…
Dyelsixa is a redaing disorder taht diruputs how yuor barin proessces wtirten langague due to…
Have you ever entered a room for the first time and get the feeling that…