Insanity Vs Insanity

“In order to avail oneself of the defence of insanity, a man must be totally deprived of understanding and memory that he is not to know what he was doing, not more than an infant, brute or a wild beast”

As early as the 13th Century, the English Lord Bracton established the principle of what makes a person insane. He said that some people simply do not know what they are doing and act in a manner "as to be not far removed from the brute" . From that concept, insanity came to mean that a person lacks the awareness of what he or she is doing and therefore cannot form intent to do wrong. Since there was no malice in the intent of his or her actions, then there could be no technical guilt. From 1324, insanity became a concept in English law, when the land of those that belonged to those who were believed to be idiots and lunatics were able to be taken by the King’s prerogative via the Statute de Praerogativa Regis. An idiot and a lunatic were the two terms used to describe people of a lesser mind; the first referred to those who had been born insane and the second to those who had later become insane. The treatment of an insane defendant up until the late 16th century was that they would not be punished in the same way as a sane defendant would be as the punishment wouldn’t set the same example to an insane person; an insane person didn’t have the capacity to hold a mens rea and that to be insane was punishment enough with the phrase furiosus solo fitrere punitur being used to justify the leniency towards an insane person .

The vast majority of cases saw the insane defendant simply be allowed to return home and in some cases, held in imprisonment until a royal pardon was granted. Other leniencies for an insane person was that they co...

... middle of paper ...

...he prosecution’s witnesses but were not allowed to make a speech . Leading up to and between 1780 and 1799, it shows that the penal system was beginning to develop more of a consciousness of the mind of the insane and that it could no longer be dealt with simply. It was now understood that the mind was more complex and that it was necessary to use the expertise and knowledge of professionals. Those whose mind was believed to be insane and found guilty faced suitable punishments for their crimes, but it was those who were considered to be insane and not guilty of their respective crimes that did not. Approximately 1 out of 4 both guilty and not guilty defendants were taken into care or detained in either madhouses or prisons whilst the rest were allowed to walk freely amongst society. This would, however change in the following year after the trial of James Hadfield.