Related Experiment Videos
The insanity verdict, the psychopath, and post-acquittal confinement
1New York Medical College, NY.
The Psychiatric Quarterly
|January 1, 1992
Summary
The insanity defense often leads to unjust confinement. Abolishing it and considering mental illness during sentencing promotes ethical and humane treatment for all offenders.
Area of Science:
- Forensic Psychology
- Legal Psychology
- Criminal Justice
Background:
- The insanity defense, resulting in automatic post-acquittal confinement, has been criticized as disguised punishment.
- Legal challenges have arisen regarding the constitutional validity of replacing the insanity defense with statutes focusing on mental state at the time of the offense.
Observation:
- Two state supreme courts have upheld statutes replacing the insanity defense, deeming them constitutionally sound.
- The Supreme Court's 1992 Foucha v. Louisiana decision highlighted issues with continued confinement of insanity acquittees no longer mentally ill but still dangerous.
Findings:
- Abolishing the insanity defense is necessary to prevent inappropriate confinement.
- Expert testimony can establish a defendant's lack of required mental state for an offense.
Implications:
- Implementing new procedures can ensure public safety while treating offenders ethically and humanely.
- Mental illness should be primarily considered during mitigation, disposition, and sentencing, not for outright exculpation.