Insanity_Defense_And_Concepts

Insanity Defense And Concepts The insanity defense is when a defendant may be excused from criminal responsibility if at the time of the commission of the act the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from a disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and the quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know that he was doing what was wrong. Thus, according to the rule, a person is basically insane if he or she is unable to distinguish between right and wrong as a result of some mental disability. (Siegel, Larry J. 2001) Insanity is a legal, not a medical definition. Therefore, mental illness and insanity are not synonymous: only some mental illness constitutes insanity. Insanity, however, includes not only mental illness but also mental deficiencies. Due to this, there are problems in exactly how to apply a medical theory to a legal matter (Wrobleski, Henry M. and Hess, Karen M. 2000) Opponents of the insanity defense charge that criminal responsibility is separate from mental illness and the two should not be equated. They argue that it is a serious mistake to consider criminal insanity, defense, mental, insane, law, responsibility, siegel, larry, illness, 2001, wrong, wrobleski, theory, should, rea, mens, legal, know, karen, hess, henry, criminal, committed, am, act, 2000, white, taken, right, reality, punishment, person, medical, individual, however