More handpicked essays just for you.
Why the insanity defense should be reformed
The Tell-Tale Heart by Edgar Allan Poe 1809-1849
The relationship between mental illness and crime is complex
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Why the insanity defense should be reformed
The insanity defense is typically sought in murder trials. Though the insanity defense is rarely used, it remains controversial. However, the debate is clouded by the public’s misconceptions. Many believe the defendant will walk away free. Also, it is believed that the insanity defense is abused. It is important to keep in mind that a lot of events leading up to the murder are not publically known. Therefore, it is wrong to assume that the defense is being contrived. Often times, help is sought out before a heinous crime is committed. It is important to realize that many mentally ill people do not recognize there is a problem. For example, the narrator in Edgar Allan Poe’s, The Tale Tell Heart states, “Now this is the point. You fancy
The Insanity Plea is a book about the Uses & Abuses of the Insanity Defense in
With murder charges of fifteen people, cannibalism, and necrophilia hanging over his head, Jeffery Dahmer plead not guilty by reason of insanity. Since Dahmer was a child he had shown withdraws and avoidance of society. He had a habit of collecting dead animals, and he would dissect, dissolve them in many different ways. When Dahmers plea of insanity was rejected by the court, he was then charged with fifteen counts of murder (Yoong). Many believe that when Jeffrey Dahmer 's plea was rejected that it was the end of anyone using, but that isn’t the case. It is used quite rarely, but it is still in use. In all reality, the insanity plea should always be rejected. The only way it should be allowed is if the criminal is fully innocent. “The insanity
...r. Furthermore, they states that have abolished the defense have implemented firmer criteria to apply or prove the defense, about one-fourth of the states have established a separate verdict of ‘Guilty but Mentally Ill. This is used as an alternative (not instead of) the insanity defense,” (Torry and Billick, 2010.) This verdict is offered to the jury when the deliberation concludes that the accused committed the act indicted, but suffers from a mental disorder, perhaps, not at the level needed to meet the insanity defense (Torry and Billick, 2010.) Since many states have abbreviated their own “Insanity Defense” laws, or have abolished them, the United States Federal Government, should impose that the insanity defense be abolished, and in its place, a verdict enacted allowing mentally insane people to serve time, and yet have treatment during their prison sentence.
In 1941, two brothers sat in court smashing their heads on the desks until they bled, barking like dogs, and crying sporadically. They weren’t insane, but that was exactly what the men wanted the jury to think. Anthony and William Esposito were being charged for robbing a payroll truck and shooting someone in the process. The jury was still skeptical until, ten months before the sentence, the Esposito brothers began to refuse any and all food they were offered. Almost a year later, the men were taken, in their almost dead state, to the electric chair and were executed. This is only one of the many examples of the insanity defense being abused. In this case, the criminals did not succeed in getting out of punishment, but there have been many successful cases that are being questioned too late. Although the insanity plea is important to those who have medical record of a psychological disorder, our “perfect” law needs to fine-tune the defense to prevent people from using it to escape going to jail or being executed.
What’s more, the success rate of those cases is only about 26%. Insanity defense can be a possible escape to crime, but in order to state as true the defense of insanity or the insanity plea, the person who is being sued or was sued must declare that he/she is not responsible for his/her actions because of their mental health problem. That person must strongly express that he/she was not aware of the actions. Usually, the first thing that is done in a person’s insanity plea is that he /she needs to go through a thorough mental process. Psychologists or Psychiatrists can help the process on how to figure out the person’s actual state of mind during the crime. However, they are not in the position to decide whether the person is really insane. Only the jury can decide whether the statements in court or the findings support the criminal insanity defense. If the court finds the person is guilty for the possible crime but she or she was not mentally responsible during the time that the crime was committed, often, they will be sent to a psychiatric hospital or placed in a mental hospital for the criminally insane. Usually, punishment is not forever; it will only last until the person is no longer a threat to the people of the world. There are cases where they claim insanity only lasts a certain period of time. This kind of defense is very hard to prove. If the person declares that their
Much of my skepticism over the insanity defense is how this act of crime has been shifted from a medical condition to coming under legal governance. The word "insane" is now a legal term. A nuerological illness described by doctors and psychiatrists to a jury may explain a person's reason and behavior. It however seldom excuses it. The most widely known rule in...
When someone commits a crime, he or she may use mental illness as a defense. This is called an insanity plea or insanity defense. What the insanity defense does is try to give the alleged perpetrator a fair trial. At least in extreme cases, society agrees with this principle. The problem is where do we draw the line. Under what circumstances is a person considered insane, and when are they not? The trouble with the insanity defense in recent years is the assumption that virtually all criminals have some sort of mental problem. One important point is that the crime itself, no matter how appalling, does not demonstrate insanity. Today, the insanity defense has become a major issue within the legal system. If the defendant is clearly out of touch with reality, the police and district attorney ordinarily agree to bypass the trial and let the defendant enter a mental hospital.
In the 1959 film Anatomy of a Murder Lieutenant Frederick Manion is accused and tried for the murder of Barney Quill; the accused rapist of Mrs. Manion, the wife of the defendant. Citing temporary insanity due to an “irresistible impulse” to seek justice for his wife’s rape, a jury finds Lt. Manion not guilty in the death of Barney Quill by reason of insanity Although the Hollywood interpretation of the insanity defense in Anatomy of a Murder results in a verdict favorable to the defense, this is not typically the case in real life criminal trials due to the specificity of circumstances that are required to support that defense. Specifically, if Lt. Manion’s trial were a real case and tried in the state of Maryland in the year 2014, his defense strategy
Have you ever felt stuck? Wherever you are, it’s the absolute last place you want to be. In the book Into the Wild, Chris McCandless feels stuck just like the average everyday person may feel. Chris finds his escape plan to the situation and feels he will free himself by going off to the wild. I agree with the author that Chris McCandless wasn’t a crazy person, a sociopath, or an outcast because he got along with many people very well, but he did seem somewhat incompetent, even though he survived for quite some time.
The insanity defense pertains that the issue of the concept of insanity which defines the extent to which a person accused of crimes may be alleviated of criminal responsibility by reason of mental disease. “The term insanity routinely attracts widespread public attention that is far out of proportion to the defense’s impact on criminal justice” (Butler,133). The decision of this defense is solely determined by the trial judge and the jury. They determine if a criminal suffers from a mental illness. The final determination of a mental disease is solely on the jury who uses evidence and information drawn from an expert witness. The result of such a determination places the individual accused, either in a mental facility, incarcerated or released from all charges. Due to the aforementioned factors, there are many problems raised by the insanity defense. Some problems would be the actual possibility of determining mental illness, justify the placement of the judged “mentally ill” offenders and the total usefulness of such a defense. In all it is believed that the insanity defense should be an invalid defense and that it is useless and should potentially be completely abolished.
Insanity (legal sense): A person can be declared insane if they are conscious while committing the crime, committing the criminal act voluntarily, and had no intent to inflict harm. A person declared insane lacks rational intent due to a deficit or disorder, which inhibits their rational thinking
We have an insanity defense to help protect people with mental illness. As you'll see, though, convincing a jury of your insanity is tricky, and only about 1 percent of cases that use the insanity defense are successful (and of that successful 1 percent, only about 15 to 25 percent of those cases are acquittals) [source: Lilienfeld]. Societies have been using some form of the insanity defense throughout history, and we're going to begin our list with Richard Lawrence, the man who tried to assassinate President Andrew Jackson.
What makes a good person good? According to WikiHow, "We should learn to define our own morals ourselves. One of the simplest ways to do so is to love others, and treat them as you would like to be treated. Try to think of others before yourself. Even doing small things daily will greatly enrich and improve your life, and the lives of others around you." This quote shows us what we need to do in order to be what society thinks as, “good". In order to be a good person, you have to do good and moral things in your society consistently. However people might think that by doing one good thing once in a while will automatically make you a “good person”, but in reality it doesn’t.
Mental Illness is one of the growing illness in United States. According to National Alliance of Mental Illness”1 in 5 adults experiences a mental health condition every year. 1 in 20 lives with a serious mental illness such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.” If the person has a five family member, one of them could be diagnosed with mental illness. If there is 40 students in class room at least two of them could be living with serious mental illness. Although mental illness is something that familiar to us, there is still misunderstood and stigma towards mental illness. Then why many people still have a wrong knowledge and attitude toward mental illness?
It is deeply alarming that ignoring mental health is systematically ignored as an important part of health promotion. This is shocking because, in theory, mental health is recognized as an important component of health, the close link between physical and mental health is recognized, and it is generally known that physical and mental health share many of the same social, environmental and economic components. We know that facilities dedicated to those with mental health problems are more vulnerable to the resources of physical diseases in many parts of the world, and it is essential that mental health promotion should not be equally affected