Plea of Insanity as a Defense in Criminal Cases: an Update
نویسندگان
چکیده
Mc'Naughten Rule is die commonest formulation for plea of insanity in most countries. Although assessment of the mental state at the time of offence is difficult, few instruments have been devised for this purpose. In the USA, efforts are being made to abolish the insanity defense and in the United Kingdom, amendments in the provisions of insanity defense have been proposed. The authors have stressed the need for some changes in the relevant sections of Indian Penal Code to increase the credibility of Psychiatric testimony in such cases.
منابع مشابه
Insanity defense pleas in Baltimore City: an analysis of outcome.
OBJECTIVE The authors studied all defendants in Baltimore City's circuit and district courts who pleaded not criminally responsible, Maryland's version of the not guilty by reason of insanity plea, during a 1-year period. The study was designed to compare the perception that the insanity plea is misused to actual outcome data. METHOD The cohort of defendants who pleaded not criminally respons...
متن کاملPhilosophical Perspectives on the Insanity Defense
1 The insanity defense and philosophy More has been written on the insanity defense than on any other single topic in criminal law,1 and yet statistically the plea of insanity is fairly rare, being considerably less common as a courtroom phenomenon than most laymen might expect.2 A reason for this apparent antinomy is that the insanity defense raises assumptions and issues that are at the very ...
متن کاملThe insanity defense in Illinois -- a psychiatric perspective.
The insanity defense has come under increasingly strong attack by both lawyers! and psychiatrists,2 at least in part, because of its lack of clarity in relating mental illness to criminal responsibility. Recent scholarly publications3.4 have exhaustively reviewed the pertinent medical-legal, social, and philosophical issues surrounding the contemporary debate regarding retention or abolition of...
متن کاملRevisiting the insanity defense: contested or consensus?
The author assesses the accuracy of both the public's opinion and researchers' conclusions regarding the method of adjudication of insanity cases and investigates the impact of the various types of reforms enacted in the 1980s on the degree to which insanity cases are contested. Data from seven states are analyzed. The public's view that insanity cases are typically resolved by a jury trial is ...
متن کاملIn Defense of Cultural “Insanity”: Using Insanity as a Proxy for Culture in Criminal Cases
Courts in the United States do not recognize a formal “cultural defense” for criminal acts committed by defendants belonging to other cultures. This means that courts ostensibly do not take foreign cultural practices, customs, or beliefs into account in evaluating the guilt of individuals who break U.S. laws. Nonetheless, courts have repeatedly permitted cultural evidence to be introduced as an...
متن کامل