The Insanity Defense; Legal or Illegal?

The Insanity Defense has always been a controversial issue. Can people really be too mentally ill to be responsible or does their mental defect affect their way of thinking at the time of a crime? People who plead not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) do not go to prison for their crime but usually spend time in a psychiatric hospital until mental health authorities determine when they are not a danger to society. The insanity defense focuses on the defendant 's state of mind at the time of the crime. The insanity defense is different than pleading guilty but mentally ill (GMI). Being mentally ill means they know that what they are doing is wrong but their disorder pressured them to commit criminal acts.

There are different ways to prove if you are legally insane so you are not responsible for your crime. Being legally insane, according to dictionary, is when mental illness of such severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality as well as cannot conduct her/his affairs due to age or injury. Some examples of tests include the alignment test, the wild beast test, M 'Naghten rule, and the American Law Institute.

Back in the six century, Rome did not know how to deal with mentally ill or insane people. In their Code of Justinian it says, "madman" or a child could not be held responsible for a crime because such people were "not capable of wrongful intention".

The Alignment test also known as the Good-Evil test is a test on your character. There are three basic characteristics; good, neutral or evil. They can be divided into lawful, neutral/true, or chaotic. Everyone is either honorable, practical, or independent. Depending on your character you can be humane, realistic, or determined.

The wild beast test was mentioned in the eighteen century. Under this test, the defendant would have to be "totally deprived of his understanding and memory so as not knowing what he [was] doing, no more than an infant, a brute, or a wild beast". Most of the tests after this were more specific and made it harder for defendants to use the defense.

M 'Naghten rule as known as the right-wrong test is testing to see if the accused knows right from wrong when they claim temporary insanity. In the court house, it is a prebuttal presumption that you are sane and they have to prove that they were insane at the time of the crime. Following the M 'Naghten rule, in 1978, Supreme Court of California made another test the American Law Institute (ALI). It states that, "A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law."

There aren 't that many organizations that help the mentally ill other than The National Alliance for Mental Ill (NAMI). This organization is funded mostly from pharmaceutical companies and started in 1979. It supports families and mental ill patients with psychoeducation, and research for better treatments. Most supporters are politicians and famous actors.

There are fifty-one types of insanity defenses in the United States, one for each set of state laws and one for federal law. On average less than one defendant in 100 actually use the insanity defense. Defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity is around 0.26 %. About 70 % of defendants found legally sane by a state-appointed expert withdraw from their plea of NGRI. The insanity defense is used in less than 1 % of all court cases. Of the cases that found the defendant NGRI, 90 % of the defendants had been already previously diagnosed with mental illness.

After the President Reagan assassination attempt, the insanity defense reform act of 1984 was passed. It made it harder for defendants to use the verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity. The reform reads, " It is an affirmations defense to a prosecution under any federal statute that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendant and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts. Mental disease or defect does not otherwise constitute a defense." So now in order to use the insanity defense, you would have to have a severe mental disease and have a total lack or understanding or partial comprehension.

The Model Penal Code twenty-five reads, "In any criminal proceeding, including any juvenile court proceeding, in which a pleas of not guilty by reason of insanity is entered, the defense shall be found by the trier of fact only when the accused person proves by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was incapable of knowing or understanding the nature and quality of his or her act and of distinguishing right from wrong at the time of the commission of the offense." Proposition eight, the "Victims ' Bill of Rights", which made Penal Code twenty-five, states "In any criminal proceeding, including any juvenile court proceeding, in which a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity is entered, this defense shall be found by the trier of fact only when the accused person proves by a preponderance of evidence that he or she was incapable of knowing or understanding the nature and quality of his or her act and of distinguishing right from wrong at the time of the commission of the offense." This states that the defendant must be not capable of understanding the nature of his or her act as well as not know from right and wrong.

The media has made the controversial issue of the inanity defense known in the cases of Hinckley, Dahmer, White, and Gacy. The case of John Hinckley Jr is one of the most famous cases. He became obsessed with actress Jodie Foster, who played in the movie Taxi Driver which also Robert Deniro plays Travis Bickle who plots to assassinate the presidential candidate in the movie. He began to stalk Jodie Foster and even thought about committing suicide in front of her. He decided to plot an assassination on President Ronald Reagan. After leaving a Hilton Hotel, Hinckley shot at the president six times but only one bullet hit his chest and he survived. Hinckley 's defense pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity and he was dismissed of all thirteen charges of assault, murder and weapon counts. The outcome of this cases was more strict laws on the defense.

Another publicized case was of Jeffrey Dahmer a serial killer and sex offender in 1991. Some of his offenses involved sex, cannibalism, necrophilia, and dismemberment. He committed his first murder in 1978, bludgeoning to death Steve Hicks, a hitchhiker because "the guy wanted to leave and didn 't want him to." In September 1987, he picked up Steven Tuomi at a gay bar and killed him out of impulse, claiming no memory of the event later in trial. In 1988, he was also arrested for giving drugs and sexual fonding a thirteen year old boy, Somsack Sinthasomphone. As a registered sex offender, he would then proceed to commit fifteen more murders, storing the corpses in vats. He plead not guilty by reason of insanity which was rejected. He served 15 murder charges and sentenced to fifteen consecutive life sentences. This case is important because if this physcopath is denied the defense then no other criminal would qualify for the defense.

The case of Dan White is also known as the famous Twinkie case. He was charged for the murders of San Francisco city supervisor Harvey Milk and mayor George Moscone. Mr. White defense team said he suffered diminished capacity because of his depression since he changed his healthy diet to Twinkies and junk food. He was convicted of voluntary manslaughter.

John Wayne Gacy took a job as "Pogo the Clown" and as secretary treasurer in the street lighting commission. People became suspicious when boys who worked with him started disappearing. Police obtained a search warrant for Mr. Gacy after he denied any knowledge on the missing boys. Authorities found thirty skeletons beneath his home of high school students and male prostitutes who he took to his home to rape as well as torture. Gacy admitted to the killings but pled insanity, which was rejected, so he was convicted and sentenced to death in 1994.
Should we allow the insanity to still continue? There are always two sides to an issue. We should keep the insanity defense because its fair for the mentally ill, defendants are not sentenced to death, and to use the defense you need the burden of proof.

Pleading not guilty by reason of insanity is fair to those who have mental defects. Mental illness is a disease of the mind, that stops people of normal emotion and behavior skills. Most people think that mental disorders only affect people with life situations that are different than their own but in the United States very few families don 't have anyone that aren 't diagnosed with mental defects. There are many different mental illnesses like depression, schizophrenia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, and obsessive compulsive disorder.

Another positive thing about keeping the defense is that defendants are not sentenced to death if they are found not guilty by reason of insanity. Most of the time defendants who use the defense spend twice as long in a psychiatric hospital than jail time for their acts. Few insanity defendants are given supervised release, and very less are released right after their verdict.

In order to use the defense you need to prove insanity by the burden of proof. The burden of proof means "without reasonable doubt" that what you claim is true and right. They have to provide clear and convincing evidence. Mentally defected defendants deserve treatment not a jail sentence for the safety of the public.

The insanity defense is an excuse for defendants, a crime is a crime no matter what and it does not guarantee freedom. The defense is an excuse for defendants to be not guilty of crimes they commit. Victims of abuse often say they are temporarily insane for defending their violent behavior during the time of their crimes. For example, the case of Lorena Bobbitt was charged with cutting off her husband 's penis, she was released of her assault charges because of her husband 's emotional and physical abuse.

How can a person who is insane know how to pick up a gun and use it to shoot a person? A crime is a crime no matter your state of mind at the time. Most defendants plead not guilty by reason of insanity even after admitting to their crimes. Defendants easily abuse the defense and trick psychiatric evaluators when they are in a mental institute so they can be let out early. A Michigan ex-convict plead insanity after seven killings and returned to the streets in two months. In a month, he was charged with murdering his wife.

Using the NGRI defense will put on on your records and it does not guarantee freedom. Some jurisdictions do not accept the insanity plea and those that do need a burden of prove. It 's hard to prove insanity without having previous medical records of an illness that would affect their way of thinking at the time of their acts. People convicted of insanity could spend the rest of their life 's inside a mental institute.

I was interested in writing about the insanity defense because I wanted to learn more about it and how it works in a trial. I thought the insanity defense was just a complete waste and it 's a criminal 's easiest excuse to freedom. I have always been interested in criminals ' minds and reading about murder cases. I decided this was a great controversial issue to write on because students need to do their research and get educated when it comes to laws to improve our society as well as our courts.

I decided that keeping the insanity defense was the best answer to this controversial issue. I think this because I believe that everyone should be treated equal no matter what condition of mental health they are. After doing research, the most surprising thing I found out was that the insanity defense is hardly used and its not as easy to be found not guilty by reason of insanity like I first initially thought. Throughout the history of the insanity defense, the government has been improving the defense so banning it all together won 't give justice to all Americans. I personally think most people have the misconception that the insanity defense should be banned because the media publicizes a one-sided story out on the newspapers that people are committing crimes mad getting away with it.

I think society feels that the insanity defense is just a loophole in the system when it comes to crimes. They don 't take in consideration of people who do have real diagnosed mental defects. The insanity defense is not allowed in Kansas, Montana, Idaho and Utah. In other states in America the tests on insanity varies but most of the time include proof of burden.

In the future, I hope students as well as voters will learn more about how serious mental illness are before they make an assumption. In the United States, you are innocent until proven guilty and it should stay that way. Not all brain diseases are categorized as mental disorders and scientists are learning that mental illness is associated with changes in the brain structure, chemistry, function as well as that mental disorders are not biological.

I feel that soon people will ban the insanity defense all together. I think this will probably happen after a high publicized case that let the defendant be not guilty by reason of insanity. Hopefully if voters really took the time to know the laws and the background of the insanity defense they will understand why it is important to keep the insanity defense. Keeping the insanity defense is not a problem because there are already a few number of cases even using the defense. In most cases that the defendant admits to their crimes, they try to accept a plea bargain before they try for the NGRI plea.

Outline for the Insanity Defense

I. The Background of the Insanity Defense A. Definitions 1. Insanity Defense 2. Legally Insane B. Kinds of Tests 1. Code of Justinian 2. The Alignment Test 3. Wild Beast Test 4. M 'Naghten Rule 5. American Law Institute C. Organizations 1. The National Alliance for Mental Ill D. Statistics E. Laws 1. Insanity Defense Reform Act 2. Model Penal Code F. People 1. John Hinckley Jr. 2. Jeffrey Dahmer 3. Dan White 4. John Gacy
II. Pros of the Insanity Defense 1. Fair for the Mentally Ill 2. Not sentenced to death 3. Burden of proof
III. Cons of the Insanity Defense 1. Excuse for defendants 2. Crime is a crime 3. No guarantee of freedom
IV. My Decision 1. Why the Insanity Defense? 2. Keep the defense
V. What 's to come in the Future 1. Society 's view 2. Educated society about mental illnesses 3. No more insanity pleas

Bibliography

Bender, David. Mental Health. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999.

Collins, Kimberly. The John Hinckley Trial and Its Effects on the Insanity Defense. [online]
Available http:// law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrails/hinckleyinsanity.htm. 11 April 2013.

Fact on File News Services. "Inanity Defense." Issues & Controversies. [online] Available http:// www.2facts.com/article/:0401890. 17 February 2009.

Rowe, Jonathan. "Why Liberals should hate the Insanity Defense." The Washington Monthly, May 1984.

Silver, Stuart B. and Cohen, Marcia I. and Spodack, Michael K. "Follow-up after Release of Inanity Acquittees, Mentally Disordered Offenders and Convicted Felons." 20 April 2013.

Young, Gideon. Top 10 Notorious Insanity Defense Cases. [online] Available http://listverse.com/2012/04/11/top-10-most-notorious-insanity-defense-cases/. 11 April 2012.

Endnotes

The John Hinckley Trial & Its Effects on the Insanity Defense, available [online] http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/hinckley/hinckleyinsanity.htm 22 April 2013.

National Alliance on Mental Illness, available [online] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Alliance_on_Mental_Illness 20 April 2013.

Inanity Defense, available [online] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense 30 April 2013.

The 'Insanity defense ' and diminished capacity, available [online] http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/insane/insanity.html 22 April 2013.

Top 10 Most Notorious Insanity Defense Cases, available [online] http://listverse.com/2012/04/11/top-10-most-notorious-insanity-defense-cases/ 11 April 2012.

Bibliography: Bender, David. Mental Health. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999.