InsanityInsanity

RecapRecap

Key PointsKey Points Available for all offences except ones of Available for all offences except ones of

strict liability strict liability Key test for Insanity is laid out in Key test for Insanity is laid out in

M’Naghten Rules 1843:M’Naghten Rules 1843:It must be clearly proved that at the time It must be clearly proved that at the time of committing the offence:of committing the offence:

11 Had such a defect of reason from a Had such a defect of reason from a disease of mind that he did not know what disease of mind that he did not know what he was doinghe was doing

22 if he did know what he was doing, he did if he did know what he was doing, he did not consider it wrong.not consider it wrong.

What happened in M’Naghten?What happened in M’Naghten? In this case D murdered Edward In this case D murdered Edward

Drummond who was secretary to a Drummond who was secretary to a famous politician called Robert Peel. famous politician called Robert Peel. He was trying to kill Peel but missed. He was trying to kill Peel but missed. The jury found D insane and he was The jury found D insane and he was sent to a secure mental hospital. The sent to a secure mental hospital. The D at the time thought he was being D at the time thought he was being persecuted by the Tories.persecuted by the Tories.

Must be a Defect of ReasonMust be a Defect of Reason D must be incapable of reasoningD must be incapable of reasoning Due to a disease of the Due to a disease of the

mind )internal not external cause) mind )internal not external cause) Defect must be more than just Defect must be more than just

confusion or forgetfulness (Clarke confusion or forgetfulness (Clarke 1972)-shoplifting1972)-shoplifting

Defect of Reason must be Defect of Reason must be due to Disease of Mind…due to Disease of Mind…

The disease can be physical or mental The disease can be physical or mental disease which can affect the mind. disease which can affect the mind.

In Kemp (1956) D suffering from hardening In Kemp (1956) D suffering from hardening of arteries which affected supply of oxygen of arteries which affected supply of oxygen to the brain, which led him to lose to the brain, which led him to lose consciousness. consciousness.

Although D was not medically insane, since Although D was not medically insane, since his reasoning was affected, the defence of his reasoning was affected, the defence of Insanity was open to him. Insanity was open to him.

Epilepsy can be disease of mind- SullivanEpilepsy can be disease of mind- Sullivan

Source of disease is irrelevant can beSource of disease is irrelevant can be Organic (epilepsy) or Functional Organic (epilepsy) or Functional

Does not matter if disease is permanent or transient Does not matter if disease is permanent or transient and intermittent so long as existed at time of act.and intermittent so long as existed at time of act. Can be disease of any part of body so long as it effects Can be disease of any part of body so long as it effects

mind and is due to an internal cause.mind and is due to an internal cause. Epilepsy- SullivanEpilepsy- Sullivan Diabetes-Hennessey- Quick1973Diabetes-Hennessey- Quick1973 Sleep walking-BurgessSleep walking-Burgess

Internal the disease effects ability to reasonInternal the disease effects ability to reasonExternal due to taking too much/too little drugs, External due to taking too much/too little drugs,

blow to head, injury.blow to head, injury.

Talking PointTalking Point Read the case of Hennessey and Read the case of Hennessey and

Quick. Why was the defence of Quick. Why was the defence of insanity available to one defendant insanity available to one defendant and not the other?and not the other?

D must not know what he D must not know what he is doingis doing

D may not know what he is doing when:-D may not know what he is doing when:- In a state of unconsciousness or impaired In a state of unconsciousness or impaired

consciousnessconsciousness Conscious but due to mental condition does Conscious but due to mental condition does

not understand or know what he was doingnot understand or know what he was doing In Windle (1992), although D was In Windle (1992), although D was

mentally ill, he knew what he was doing mentally ill, he knew what he was doing was legally wrong, therefore he was was legally wrong, therefore he was found guilty of murder.found guilty of murder.

SummarySummary D must be labouring under a defect of reason from disease D must be labouring under a defect of reason from disease

of the mind and must either not know the nature and of the mind and must either not know the nature and quality of the act he was doing or not know he was doing quality of the act he was doing or not know he was doing wrong-Mcnaughtonwrong-Mcnaughton

Absent mindedness not enough-Clarke 1972Absent mindedness not enough-Clarke 1972 Disease of mind-legal not medicalDisease of mind-legal not medical Must be internal cause-Kemp 1956 Hennesay 1989 Burgess Must be internal cause-Kemp 1956 Hennesay 1989 Burgess

19911991 Does not need to be permanent- Sullivan 1984Does not need to be permanent- Sullivan 1984 External cause not disease of mind- QuickExternal cause not disease of mind- Quick Not know act is legally wrong- Windle 1952Not know act is legally wrong- Windle 1952 Special verdict-NG by reason of insanitySpecial verdict-NG by reason of insanity Judge can impose hospital, guardianship, supervision and Judge can impose hospital, guardianship, supervision and

treatment order or an absolute dischargetreatment order or an absolute discharge

TaskTask Copy out the table on pg 171Copy out the table on pg 171

Special VerdictSpecial Verdict If defence of insanity proved the jury return verdict If defence of insanity proved the jury return verdict

of Not Guilty by virtue of insanity.of Not Guilty by virtue of insanity. Before 1991 Judge had to send D to mental Before 1991 Judge had to send D to mental

hospital regardless of cause.hospital regardless of cause. Criminal Procedure (insanity and unfitness to Criminal Procedure (insanity and unfitness to

plead) Act extend Judge power. Can nowplead) Act extend Judge power. Can now Hospital orderHospital order Guardianship orderGuardianship order Supervision and treatment orderSupervision and treatment order An absolute dischargeAn absolute discharge

If charge of murder-must impose indefinite hospital If charge of murder-must impose indefinite hospital orderorder

Outline problems with Law Outline problems with Law of Insanity…of Insanity…

TaskTask Copy out the table on pg 173Copy out the table on pg 173

Case StudyCase Study Battak is a supporter of Saddam Hussein. Battak has had a Battak is a supporter of Saddam Hussein. Battak has had a

history of severe illness. He regularly visits a psychiatrist history of severe illness. He regularly visits a psychiatrist every Wednesday.every Wednesday.

For a long time he has held the conviction that Saddam For a long time he has held the conviction that Saddam has been unfairly victimised by the media. He has a tattoo has been unfairly victimised by the media. He has a tattoo of Saddam on his arm. of Saddam on his arm.

Last month Battak had a heated debate with a customer at Last month Battak had a heated debate with a customer at his local takeaway: Copley’s Fisheries. The worker called his local takeaway: Copley’s Fisheries. The worker called Nushanana apologised to Battak if the customer caused Nushanana apologised to Battak if the customer caused offence, not knowing that he was a big fan of the late offence, not knowing that he was a big fan of the late dictator. Two days later when news of Saddam’s execution dictator. Two days later when news of Saddam’s execution was being broadcast, Battak walked into Copley Fisheries was being broadcast, Battak walked into Copley Fisheries and stabbed Nushnana in the arm, he was prevented from and stabbed Nushnana in the arm, he was prevented from stabbing her again by co-worker Faika. Battak had a stabbing her again by co-worker Faika. Battak had a strange expression on his face before and after the attack, strange expression on his face before and after the attack, he didn’t seem to respond to people around him.he didn’t seem to respond to people around him.

Explain Battak criminal liability and any defences available to Explain Battak criminal liability and any defences available to himhim

Problems with LawProblems with Law Mcnaughton rules 1843Mcnaughton rules 1843 Medical knowledge advanced/changedMedical knowledge advanced/changed Legal definition not medicalLegal definition not medical Some people with mental illnesses do not come within it. Some people with mental illnesses do not come within it.

E.g. Irresistible impulse, psychopaths E.g. Irresistible impulse, psychopaths Some with none mental illnesses fall within it e.g. hardening Some with none mental illnesses fall within it e.g. hardening

of arteriesof arteries Justification- internal cause which can recur and possibly be Justification- internal cause which can recur and possibly be

treatedtreated Social stigmaSocial stigma Proof is on D beyond balance of probability- possibly Proof is on D beyond balance of probability- possibly

against human rightsagainst human rights Reform suggested in 1953, which would include irresistible Reform suggested in 1953, which would include irresistible

impulses etc would fall within rules.impulses etc would fall within rules. Instead created diminished responsibility-murder onlyInstead created diminished responsibility-murder only

QuizQuiz For which types of offences can For which types of offences can

Insanity be used as a defence?Insanity be used as a defence? Which case provides the rules for Which case provides the rules for

allowing defence of insanity?allowing defence of insanity? To successfully raise this defence To successfully raise this defence

what must the D show?what must the D show? If D is charged with murder and If D is charged with murder and

proves the defence of insanity what proves the defence of insanity what sentence must the Judge give?sentence must the Judge give?