Class notes
Insanity Criminal Law Notes
- Course
- Institution
Insanity Criminal Law Second Year Notes
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
molliebriggs
Reviews received
Content preview
Criminal Law Topic 6: Part 2 2017-2018Insanity and Automatism
Insanity - Overview of the Defence
The defence of insanity can arise in 2 ways:
1. A D may claim he was insane at the time of the act. This is when a plea of insanity is
raised or
2. D may claim to be insane at the time of the trial. If this is the case then it is necessary
to consider whether the D is unfit to plead.
ONLY look at the first situation:
Where the D claims that he was insane at the time he committed the act:
Rationale: D lacks rational capacity; he therefore lacks responsibility and is exempted from
liability
Burden of Proof:
• Presumption of Sanity: M’Naughten
• Defence must establish on balance of probabilities
Effect of successful plea: the special verdict – not guilty by reason of insanity
• Thomas [1995] Crim LR 314 – on relationship with automatism
• This used to result in mandatory and indefinite commitment to a hospital but that
was changed for all crimes except murder by the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and
Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991, section 5
However the law has been amended:
Under the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 section 5 as amended by the Domestic
Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004, s.24(3) :
Where—
(a) the offence to which the special verdict or the findings relate is an offence the sentence
for which is fixed by law, and
(b) the court have power to make a hospital order,
the court shall make a hospital order with a restriction order (whether or not they would
have power to make a restriction order apart from this subsection).
1
, • The court only has the power to make a hospital order if there is medical evidence
that the defendant has a mental disorder and requires treatment under the Mental
Health Act 1983.
The Test for Insanity
The M’Naughten Rules
The test for insanity is that laid down in M'Naghten's Case (1843) 10 C & F 200:
• M’Naghten suffering from delusions hoping to kill prime minister
• Shot secretary by accident
• Acquitted on grounds of insanity
Held:
• "To establish a defence on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at
the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a
defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of
the act he was doing, or, if he did know it, that he did not know what he was doing
was wrong."
To prove insanity it must be established:
1. D suffers a disease of the mind, which lead to a
2. Defect of reason,
3. Which in turn meant that either
a. D does not know the nature and quality of his act
OR
b. He does not know what he was doing was wrong
1. DISEASE OF THE MIND
Whether a particular condition amounts to a disease of the mind is not a medical question
but a legal one:
Bratty v AG for Northern Ireland [1963]
• D strangled family friend to death with own stocking, whilst giving her a lift
• Claimed to have had an epileptic fit and pleaded automatism and insanity
Held:
• Appeal dismissed
2
, • Although voluntary acts are essential to liability, not every act might ordinarily be
described as involuntary would be regarded as legally involuntary
NOTE: most people try automatism first- because they can walk free
Sullivan [1984] AC 156
• D kicked a friend during a fit, charged with inflicting GBH with intent under ss20 and
18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861
• D pleaded automatism – no recollection of the act
• Trial judge- defence was one of insanity due to disease of the mind
• D pleaded guilty to assault OCAB to avoid mandatory indefinite detention in a
mental hospital which would automatically follow a verdict of NGRI
• Convicted and appealed
HL:
• Dismissed
• Crucial distinction between automatism and insanity was the external/internal divide
• Since epilepsy was due to an internal cause- it was a disease of the mind
• Insanity viewed as social defence; protected public from violence. BUT since Mr S
had pleaded guilty to a lesser crime and was sentenced to far less than indefinite
detention, the protection the court could offer to society in reality was illusory
What is meant by ‘mind’?
R v Kemp [1957] 1 QB
• Husband made attack on wife, hitting her with hammer, causing her grievous wound
• Suffered from arteriosclerosis- had not reached stage with indicated any signs of
mental trouble
• D argued he was not suffering from a mental disease but a physical one which might
in time cause degeneration of the brain but until it did, it should be regarded as a
temporary interference
Held:
• Argument rejected, guilty but insane
• The law is not concerned with the brain, but with the mind, in the sense that ‘mind’
is ordinarily used, the mental faculties of reason, memory and understanding.
In Sullivan [1984] AC 156 Kemp was approved
Lord Diplock Mind in the M’Nagthen rules is used in the ordinary sense of the mental
faculties of reason, memory and understanding. If the effect of a disease is to impair these
faculties so severely so as to have either of the consequences referred to in the latter part
of the rules it is a disease of the mind and it doesn’t matter whether the cause of the
impairment is organic, as in epilepsy, or functional or whether it is permanent or transient.
Must the disease or violence be prone to recur?
3
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller molliebriggs. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $9.78. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
58426 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now