Insanity Flashcards
mental capacity defence
Inanity intro
only a defence that is relevant at the time of the crime -
D must prove on the balance of probabilities that they were insane
Verdict = NGRI
for murder cases = courts must give either hospital order, supervision order or absolute discharge
Insanity
Bases on the McNaghten Rules
McNaghten 1843
D suffered from extreme paranoia. thought he was being persecuted by the “tories” - tired to kill member of the government but killed secretary instead.
Set out the three elements of insanity
Elements of Insanity
- Defect of reason
- as a results of a Disease of the mind
- this causes the D not to know the nature and quality of his act/not to know that what he was doing was wrong
- Defect of Reason
powers of reasoning must be impaired
if capable of reasoning, but D fails to use these powers = not a defence
Defcet of reason must be mre than absent-mindedness or confusion - Clarke
Clarke
D went to shops, picked up 3 items, left without paying (one of the items neither her or her husband ate)
said that she was suffering from absent mindedness from depression causing her to not remember doing it - not sufficient
- Disease of the mind
Legal ter, not a medical one
Can be physical or mental which affects the mind
physical illness - R V Kemp (hardening of the arteries)
can be functional or organic (source of the disease is irrelevant)
organic = no physical cause
organic = brain damaged by a physical cause (e.g. epilepsy)
- R V Sullivan
Doesn’t matter whether the disease was transient or permanent, as long as it exists at the time of the offence
HIGH LEVELS OF SUGAR FOR DIABETIC PATIENTS CAN AMOUNT TO insanity - (from NOT taking insulin)
R V Henessy - hadn’t taken insulin for 3 days, stole car, had no recollection
tried to use automatism, jusged rules shouldve used insaity
- brough diabetes into defintion of inanity
SLEEP DISORDERS CAN AMOUNT TO INSANITY
R v Burgess - D attacked gf in sleep, no evidence of an external cause, evidence that D had sleep disorder
R V Kemp
D suffering from hardening of arteries - prevented blood flow to brain, attacked wife who suffered serious injuries
D admitted he had a defect of reason but didn’t think it was due to a disease of the mind as it was physical
R V Sullivan
D injured a 80yr old man who was trying to help him during an epileptic fit
R V Hennessy
D hadn’t taken Insulin for 3 days, stole car, no recollection
tried to use automatism, judged rules should’ve used insaity
- brought diabetes into definition of inanity
R V Burgess
D attacked gf in sleep, no evidence of an external cause, evidence that D had sleep disorder
- Not knowing the Nature and quality of the Act/did not know what he was doing was wrong
D must prove that ;
- he didn’t know what he was doing
- did not appreciate the consequences of his actions
- did not appreciate the circumstances in which he was acting
R v Oye - evidence of psychotic eppisode, hafnt known what he was doing was wrong
R V windle - D suffering from menatl illness, but words showed that he knew what he was doing was legally wrong
R V johnson -even though D suffered with SZ, evidence from psychiatrics agreed that D knew the nature and quaility of his act
R V oye
D suffered from psychotic episode - throew crockery at police at cafe when arrested, contnued to behave oddly when at police station (drank toilet water) - charged with assault and 2 counts of affray
Medical evidence of psychotic episode meant D was NGRI
R V Windle
D gave 100 asprins to wife, said “suppose they will hang me for this” - evidence that he knew what he was doing was wrong despite metal illness
