SB: MCD: Insanity

Question 1

Explain the M’Naghten Rules

Answer 1

D must labour under such a defect of reason a, from a disease of the mind as to not know the nature or quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know, he didn’t know what he was doing was wrong.

Question 2

Explain the case of M’Naghten

Answer 2

M’Naghten shot and killed Drummond, an aide to them PM Robert Peel who was M’Naghten intended target. Public so outraged that D had been allowed insanity defence that the house of lords used a medieval right to question judges who set out the M’Naghten rules.

Question 3

Explain Not Guilty by reason of insanity

Answer 3

This defence will not lead to a full acquittal instead there will be a special verdict of Not guilty by reason of insanity leading to three outcomes:
1. Hospital Order
2. Supervision Order
3. Discharge
The defence is on the balance of probabilities and must be proven by D

Question 4

Explain Defect of reason

Answer 4

D must be under a defect of reasoning. This is total deprivation of the power to control the mind.

If D is able to reason and rationalise their thoughts then there is not defence. (R v Clarke)

An incesistable impulse isnt enough to be a defect of reasoning

Question 5

Explain the legal principle of R v Clarke

Answer 5

D went into a supermarket and picked up items and left without paying. Claimed insanity explaining that she had no recollection of putting the items in her bag.

Question 6

Explain disease of the mind

Answer 6

A legal term, not a medical term it includes any physical or psychological condition which affects the mind.
Arteriosclerosis of the heart - R v Kemp
Epilepsy - R v Sullivan
Diabetes - R v Hennessey
Sleepwalking - R v Burgess

Question 7

Explain the legal principle of R v Kemp

Answer 7

Hardening of the arteries which interfered with blood supply to the brain and caused moments of temporary loss of consciousness. He attacked his wife with a hammer. It does not need to be a disease of the brain but can be mental of physical.

Question 8

Explain the legal principle of R v Sullivan

Answer 8

D suffered from epilepsy and became aggressive during these fits, he injured an 80 y/o man. The court held this was insanity as the disease of the mind can be permanent or transient and intermittent

Question 9

Explain the legal principle of R v Hennessey

Answer 9

D suffered from diabetes and had not taken his insulin for three days, he was charged with taking a motor vehicle. Diabetes may be insanity where the D is in hyperglycaemia.

Question 10

Explain the legal principle of R v Burgess

Answer 10

D attacked his girlfriend in his sleep caused by a sleep disorder.

Question 11

Explain Not knowing the nature or quality of the act

Answer 11

D must not understand the nature or quality of their act or that it was legally wrong.
R v Oye
R v Windle
R v Johnston

Question 12

Explain the legal principle of R v Oye

Answer 12

D believed the police had demonic faces and were agents of evil spirits. It was established D was going through a psychiatric episode and dint understand the nature of his acts.

Question 13

Explain the legal principle of R v Windle

Answer 13

D’s wife spoke of commenting suicide he killed her by giving her 100 aspirin pills. When arrested he said “ I suppose they’ll hang me for this” Suggesting he was aware of the nature and quality of his act. Insanity wasn’t established.

Question 14

Explain the legal principle of R v Johnson

Answer 14

D forced his way into his neighbours flat and stabbed him. D had been suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and suffering from hallucinations. However, he knew his actions were legally wrong. Insanity wasn’t available.