Data Bases • Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism? Links • Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com Free Essays • Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers	Search Lots of Essays Back to Subjects - Psychology Insanity Defense2 Insanity Defense2 The insanity plea is a poor excuse for serious lawbreakers, and should have no bearing in the sentencing of criminals. All criminal cases today have three ways in which a defendant can plea. Guilty, not guilty, or Insanity. The word insane is a legal term. Because research has identified many different mental illnesses of varying severities, it is now too simplistic to describe a severely mentally ill person merely as insane. The federal law states that insanity is a fair defense if “ at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendants as a result of sever mental disease or defect was unable to appreciate the nature and quality of the wrongfulness of his acts”(Knowles). The American Psychiatric Association recommends that · Insanity acquittals should be reserved for defendants diagnose as “psychotic”, rather than those with a less serious “antisocial personality disorder”(The APA defined a psychotic as someone so out of touch with reality he was “unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct.”) · Defendants with antisocial personality disorders should be held “accountable for their behavior.”(Such as a person, according to the APA, understood his actions but might be unconcerned about their consequences.) · Psychiatrist testimony should be limited to such areas of competence as a defendant’s motivation or mental state. · Persons judged “not guilty by reason of insanity should not be released without careful consideration by state or federal authorities. It also stated that psychiatrist were unable to predict the “dangerousness” of such persons. (APA) The American Psychiatric Association issued a position in defense of the insanity plea in criminal trails. However, the organization recommended that rules surrounding the plea be tightened. The organization defended the plea on the ground that “ punishment for wrongful deeds should be predicated upon moral responsibility.” Defendants who committed crimes without fully comprehending their actions, the APA suggested, should not be treated in the same manner as those who understood their actions (Bard). The insanity defense dates back to 1843. A man named Daniel McNaughtan tried to assassinate British Prime Minister Robert Peel. He attempted to kill the prime minister and successfully killed the prime ministers secretary. When brought to court he pleads not guilty by reason of insanity. He was found not guilty by reasons of insanity. The U.S criminal justice system adopted this legal procedure that now is established. The insanity plea has been used for the past one hundred and fifty years. The insanity defense finally received harsh critism from the public until the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald Regan. On March 30, 1981 John Hinckley shot the president and several of his aids on live television. The whole world saw the shooting. There was no doubt that he did the shooting. On May 4, 1982, after a seven-week trail, in which a ton of psychiatrist testified for Hinckley’s defense, Hinckley was found not guilty by reason of insanity. He was sent to a mental hospital in Washington D.C, where he remains today. This verdict outraged American’s, as it should have. How can a man who shoots another man on national television be given a not guilty verdict(Gado)? In 1996 television debate about the insanity defense, then Massachusetts Governor William Weld said, “Criminals should be punished regardless of their mental condition. “These people are not ‘not guilty’ by reason of insanity,” he said “There guilty”. They preformed the murder. They executed the person, and we think they should be punished.” Weld unsuccessfully tried to get Massachusetts lawmakers to abolish the insanity defense and replace it with a “guilty, but insane” verdict (Knowles). The insanity defense poses a danger to public safety because it keeps dangerous people from going to jail. Even if people found the defendant not guilty by reason of insanity, they are sent to a psychiatric hospital, they are not sent there for a specific amount of time. Some fear that authorities will release defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity while they are still a danger to society. I do not trust the ability of our justice system to accurately determine who should or should not be held responsible for their actions. The authorities have no real way of telling if someone is really insane or if they are just plane evil. America’s criminal justice system has the concept of “state of mind”. In order for a person to be held criminally liable in the courts eyes, they say, “he or she must have criminal intent or awareness of the wrongfulness of the act”. If a person claims to be mentally ill and unable to tell the difference between right and wrong, for example, then they can’t be held criminally responsible in our society. Most individuals accused of crime lack psychological sophistication. An important sign of a manipulative effort is a presentation of "memory loss". A large number of criminals seem convinced that memory loss is the same as mental illness. Memory loss accompanied with a series of simple unstructured hallucinations, particularly visual ("little green men walking around my cell") and command hallucinations ("the Devil made me do it")(Reid). In the U.S court system 47% of criminal cases defendants have plead not guilty by reason of insanity. (Gado ). I have no doubt that some of these people really are insane. I mean I believe any human who can kill another human is insane. But does that mean they should receive sympathy or a lesser sentence? Who’s to say these criminals aren’t just very intelligent actors? A perfect example of this point is the movie Primal Fear. This movie is about a young man who is accused of killing the Arch Bishop. The police finds him with the Arch Bishops blood all over him. A Hotshot lawyer named Martin Vail takes on the job of representing the accused, Aaron Stampler. Through the movie you learn that Aaron suffers from multiple personality disorder. He claims to have blackouts. He also claims to have had one of these blackouts while discovering Arch Bishops body. Aaron sees a psychiatrist and the psychiatrist testifies that indeed Aaron is legally insane. She also says that he has no recognition of the murder he committed. Aaron is found not guilty by reasons of insanity and is sentenced to a mental hospital. Only later to find out that Aaron doesn’t suffer from any disorders. He faked everyone out, lawyers, psychiatrist, jury members, and the judge. So who’s to say that others haven’t cheated the system just like Aaron did? Only a jury can decide if a defendant is in fact insane. Which in it self is the worst part about the insanity defense. People who have no training in the field of psychology and have a minimal understanding of the issues involved, make legal, long lasting judgments that are frequently based on opinions of others. So what happens to a criminal after being sentenced to a mental hospital? The law states that such a defendant should not be held criminally responsible for his or her behavior. They are then put in a mental hospital for treatment. The court evaluates the defendant after two years. If they feel that the defendant is no longer a threat to society then they may be released. So a man or women can kill and claim they were insane and then claim there are healed and get out into society, without even spending a day in jail. In a criminal cases, especially murder trials, an insanity plea is merely a defense aimed at delivering guilty defendants from the death penalty or serving time in prison. Defendants claim mental illness, and their attorneys use this loophole as a way to confuse jurors with complicated and questionable psychiatric evaluations. Most defendants who are found not guilty by reason of insanity are released from mental hospitals years, if not decades, earlier than they would be had they served prison sentences. The insanity defense ensures that criminals can avoid the punishment that fits their crimes. Bibliography: Bard, Jennifer S; Unjust Rules for Insanity, The New York Times. 13 March 2002. Gado, Mark: The insanity Defense, www.crimelibrary.com/criminology/insanity/4.htm, ( May 2001). Grinfeld, Micheal, Executing the Mentally Ill: Who is really Insane?, Psychiatric Times , May 1998, Vol XV , Issue 5 Knowles, Byran: Is the insanity plea allowing criminals to avoid justice? Online source, 3 May 2000 Reid, William, The insanity defense: Bad or Mad or Both?, Journal of Psychiatry ,May 2000. The American Psychiatric Association, Law: Psychiatrists Review Insanity Plea, 11 February 1983. Primal Fear, Dir. Gregory Hobblit, Perf. Richard Gere, Edward Nourton, John Mahoney, Alfre Woodlard. Paramount Pictures, 1996 Word Count: 1332
Copyright © 2005 College Term Papers, INC All Rights Reserved.