Petrina Murti
PSY/270
April 18, 2013
Dr.Enabulele
Mind Over Matter
Mental illness is a health condition that affects a person’s thoughts, behavior, and emotions (in some cases all three) which in turns affects the person’s ability to function in their daily lives. Insanity (used as a legal term) is an individual who is diagnosed with a mental illness, unable to know right from wrong, and is unable to function accordingly.
The second prong of McNaughten rule states “knowledge of right and wrong” (Gibeaut, 2006) with this rule, the individual must be able to prove that he or she was suffering from a mental illness during the act, and was not able to establish right from wrong. According to Gibeaut (2006) “a defendant who pleads insanity must prove that at the time of the offense he or she was suffering from a mental disease, so severely as not to know the nature and quality of the act” (pp.13).
A person who drinks alcohol and then murders someone cannot apply the McNaughten rule. Mental illness is a disease, which people don’t choose to have, and drinking alcohol is a choice that a person has, and because of that knows the difference between right and wrong.
Rational and guilty explains that the individual did commit the act, knew exactly what he or she was doing, and knew the difference between right and wrong. Guilty but insane describes an individual whom is considered insane, and may be found guilty for their act, however, would require medical treatment for their condition, and once the individual was able to establish normal functioning would then serve their sentence, because of being guilty. Not guilty by reason of insanity explains an individual whom is insane and cannot be held accountable for their act, and therefore is not guilty, however, the individual is more likely to be institutionalized in a mental health facility (varies state to state).
If I was deciding the case, Clark v. Arizona, I would rule not guilty by reason of insanity. The reason for my decision is because Clark never received the medical treatment that he needed to begin with. In the article, Clark’s parents thought he was experimenting with various substance because he was a teenager, yes his behavior worsened over the years, which because of not knowing is condition, he became delusional and out of touch with reality. In the article Clark made statements saying he had to kill the police because he thought they were aliens, that is exactly what will happen if you don’t seek medical attention. I believe that Clark was so deranged that his symptoms guided his actions, so therefore cannot be held responsible for what had occurred.
Reference
Gibeaut, J. (2006, April). A matter over mind. ABA Journal, 92(4), 32.
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
US the Supreme Court established guidelines that satisfy due process in regards to one’s competency to stand trial. The Supreme Court determined that the court must find the defendant able to rationally, and functionally understand the charges and proceedings against them, and have a present ability to assist their attorney in their defense. It is not merely enough for one to be oriented as to person, place, and time. This standard goes on to define both the cognitive and interpersonal aspects of competency to stand trial . The cognitive element is the ability to know and understand the charges and legal process being taken. The interpersonal element is in regards to the ability of the client to assist their attorney. Moreover, the Dusky standard confirms that under Higgins v. McGrath (1951), a defendant who suffers from a severe mental mental disorder may still be competent to stand trial if the defendant can understand and assist their attorney. Furthermore, because of these new guidelines, Dusky was retried and received a guilty verdict however, his sentencing was reduced by more than half. He was sentenced to 20 years with eligibility for parole in 5 years in comparison to serving the original sentence of 45…
- 565 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
I thought of diagnosing Ellen with Dysthymic disorder due to her long history of mild depressive symptoms. The reason I had this is mind was because Ellen was very tired all the time and most time have difficulties sleeping at night. She also reports that she was always unhappy.…
- 577 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
McMurphy's (Mac) behaviors do not seem to be symptoms of insanity. The case of Durham vs. United States held that "the accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect". Mac was trying to get out of the work farm by acting out and convincing the staff that he was insane. Once he was brought to the ward it was determined by the doctors and Nurse Ratched that he was not insane, but could be dangerous. In 1972 the Durham rule was replaced because of confusion in the courts about the definition of "disease". It was replaced by legal guidelines formulated by the American Law Institute and was combined with the M'Naughten principle. Basically it states that a person is not responsible for a criminal wrongdoing if at the time they do not understand the difference between right and wrong and they have not repeated the criminal offence because of their mental disease. Mac knows the difference between right and wrong and he tells the other patients that they are not insane. At the beginning of the movie when Mac is talking to Dr. Spivey, it is mentioned that Mac has had at least 5 arrests for assault. This shows that he knows that he is wrong, but continues to do…
- 975 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
The McNaughton rules were used to decide if a crime was committed by someone who was deemed to be insane at the time of their crime. McNaughton rules were so named after Daniel McNaughton who attempted to kill the current Prime Minister as he had an imaginary grudge against him but for no real reason, just his “state of mind” at the time had led him to believe that so he was found “not guilty by reason of insanity”…
- 79 Words
- 1 Page
Satisfactory Essays -
The Insanity defense first came into England’s radar when Daniel McNaughton, who attempted to murder, Prime Minister Robert Peel. McNaughton Rule became a common law test to determine criminal liability in relation to mentally disturbed defendants. Another notable case is that of Reagan, John Hinckley who in 1981 attempted to assassinate the president.…
- 295 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
The insanity defense is only raised in 1% of cases and then only successful 25% of the time it is used; although its rarity, the legal court has very detailed rules. Most rules describe not guilty by reason of insanity as not being aware of what you were doing in that exact moment. Adam Banner suggests that the Eddie Routh case had an accurate ruling of guilty because of his claim that, “...the disposition is ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’. It is not ‘not guilty by reason of mental illness’,”. Only Mental Health America would disagree, stating, “The Court has indicated that states may be required to provide at least some minimal defense based on mental illness,”. Coincidently, these changes have not been made thus…
- 803 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
Guilty but insane means that the individual knew at the time that their actions were wrong but because of their mental disorder or disease they had no control over their actions.…
- 525 Words
- 3 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
The brain is an amazing arrangement. It is the most rigid and interesting part of the human body. It is like a computer that controls every part of the body. The brain consist of many millions of neurons cells that support the brain system this is called Glial cells (Pinel 2011 p.55)…
- 871 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
You are considered insane if a mental disorder stops you from managing matters or obeying the law. John Hinckley’s verdict of Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity created a big commotion among the public. Many felt that the verdict was being used as a means for criminals to avoid their prison sentence, and to await their time in a prison facility (Simon, and Aaronson, 1988).…
- 1151 Words
- 5 Pages
Powerful Essays -
Their exhaustive examination of the extensive case-law concerning the defense of insanity prior to and at the time of the trial of M'Naughten establishes convincingly that it was morality and not legality which lay as a concept behind the judges' use of "wrong" in the M'Naghten…
- 1708 Words
- 7 Pages
Powerful Essays -
And often the cases involving an insanity plea gets the most attention because they involve crime that are bizarre within themselves. On February 22, 2016 an article name “Maryland Mom Found Not Responsible in Boy Death in Swing” was release. This article shares with us that Simms was found not responsible in her son’s death. Simms was found pushing her son in a park swing for 40 hours until he died from hypothermia and dehydration. “She was then ruled not criminally responsible, Maryland's equivalent to not guilty by reason of insanity.”(Ahn) She was later found not responsible since she was declare to have schizophrenia. She was ruled not to be a danger to the community and was freed on a conditional release.…
- 997 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
This paper will talk about the meaning of the insanity defense. It will also include the definition of the words not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) and guilty but mentally ill (GBMI). Will answer question how insanity and psychology’s role in the definition. As well as how frequently is the insanity defense is used and how successful it is. In addition to the common beliefs about the insanity defense and their accuracy. For example, it will discuss some of the concerns or major criticisms about the insanity defense and the legitimacy to those concerns.…
- 99 Words
- 1 Page
Satisfactory Essays -
One of the many issues that trouble the American Justice System today is that of the insanity defense. This defense has been brought in front of courts for years and has caused massive debate. The insanity defense plays a powerful role in our society which begs for justice. However some look upon it as a god sent, while other feel it is the enemy. ?The insanity defense is rooted in a basic principle of justice: that it is unfair to hold persons responsible for their actions when they don?t know, or cant control, what they are doing? (Worth 16), but is it true that people really don?t ?know? what they are doing; and if so should they still be punished for it? Many who share negative feelings towards the insanity defense believe that it is not a defense in the victims case but a defense to aid the perpetrator.…
- 845 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
Mental illness can be defined as a psychological or behavioral pattern that occurs in an individual and is thought to cause distress or disability that is not expected as part of normal development or culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_illness). Some people that suffer from mental illness are required to take medication to control their symptoms. No medications can cure mental illness, but it can reduce relapse. Many people that suffer from mental illness believe that they can function without medication. Most mental illness cannot be detected by looking at a person. When defining mental illness, a person must realize that the definition is broad. The reason for this is because there are several mental illnesses. However, the definition of mental illness just categorizes all mental illnesses.…
- 773 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
It has called for a new definition of the word “insanity” and has caused many new standards to be put in place. A new standard, for example, is the competency test. All jurisdictions require that criminals must be competent to stand trial, meaning that the accused knows the nature of their actions and understand that what they did was wrong, if they cannot do that they will be found to be mentally incompetent to stand the trial (FindLaw). This, however, does not mean that the person is immediately found not guilty or innocent. The person will receive treatment until they are competent enough to stand trial. The insanity defense also called for a reform act in 1984, stating that the defendant must be unable to understand the “nature and quality of the wrongfulness of his acts” (FindLaw). It also states that a mental disease does not constitute as an argument. Lastly, the insanity defense has called for a test that decides if the criminal is mentally ill, however, guilty. The guilty but mentally ill verdict allows criminals who are mentally ill to be found liable for their actions and receive treatment while in jail or be sent to a mental hospital. Once they are seen to be well enough, they will be sent to prison to serve their…
- 842 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays