Insanity Defense Variations and Alternatives for Addressing the Criminal Responsibility of a Defendant with a Mental Disorder

2019 ◽  
pp. 237-268
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Hafemeister
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Insanity Defense ◽  
Multiple Personality Disorder ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Diminished Capacity ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Child Syndrome ◽  
Criminal Intent

Because of continuing reservations about the insanity defense but with the underlying consensus that a defendant’s mental disorder at the time of the offense should in some cases be relevant when determining criminal responsibility, various iterations of and alternatives to the insanity defense have been recognized. Chapter 9 addresses a number of these variations, such as the deific decree defense, the PTSD defense, the battered spouse/child syndrome defense, and the urban psychosis defense, as well as the abolition of the insanity defense or related mental health evidence, shifting the burden of proof to the defendant, heightening the level of proof required to establish the defense, the guilty but mentally ill verdict, the diminished capacity defense, and the so-called temporary or “he/she snapped” defense. This chapter also discusses other criminal responsibility issues that a defendant’s mental disorder may impact, namely, the mens rea (criminal intent) and actus reus (criminal act) elements of a criminal prosecution. For example, if a defendant lacked control over his or her actions, a crime is not considered to have occurred. Thus, the law recognizes an automatism or unconsciousness argument, which may encompass epilepsy, a concussion, or a fugue state. More controversial are the sleep-walking defense and the “multiple personality disorder” defense. This chapter also addresses the two USSC rulings germane to these various iterations and alternatives.

scholarly journals Between Punishment and Care: Autonomous Offenders Who Commit Crimes Under the Influence of Mental Disorder

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Hartvigsson
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Involuntary Treatment ◽  
Psychiatric Condition ◽  
Psychiatric Institutions

AbstractThe aim of this paper is to present a solution to a problem that arises from the fact that people who commit crimes under the influence of serious mental disorders may still have a capacity to refuse treatment. Several ethicists have argued that the present legislation concerning involuntary treatment of people with mental disorder is discriminatory and should change to the effect that psychiatric patients can refuse care on the same grounds as patients in somatic care. However, people with mental disorders who have committed crimes and been exempted from criminal responsibility would then fall outside the scope of criminal justice as well as that of the psychiatric institutions if they were to refuse care. In this paper, I present and develop a solution to how society should deal with this group of people, called Advance criminal responsibility. The basic idea being that if a person with a potentially responsibility exempting psychiatric condition refuses care, that person is responsible for any future criminal acts which are due to the mental disorder.

scholarly journals Recognising the Role of the Emotion of Fear in Offences and Defences

2019 ◽  
Vol 83 (6) ◽  
pp. 450-472
Author(s):  
Susan SM Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Emotional States ◽  
Loss Of Self ◽  
Human Conduct ◽  
Privileged Status ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Male Experience

Anger, its part in human conduct and in crime commission has been much discussed and accorded a privileged status within the law, while the role of fear has been less considered. Notwithstanding, fear and related emotional states have received some recognition as intrinsic elements of the perpetrator’s object integral to the actus reus of certain offences and relevant to the defendant’s mens rea of some defences. The harm caused by deliberately or negligently instilling fear in another is inconsistently considered in law as is its impact on criminal responsibility and mens rea. Fear has been recently acknowledged as a permissible cause of loss of self-control in a partial defence to murder (Coroners and Justice Act 2009 s 55(3)). It remains a contested emotion and as with anger the male experience of what circumstances trigger fear predominates.

Problems of Iatrogenic Crimes Qualification

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.V. Pitulko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Causes Of Death ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Patient Treatment ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Medical Assistance ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Quality Of Medical Care ◽  
The Difference

The article reveals the features of the distinction between criminal and non-criminal circumstances, leading to a patient treatment unfavorable outcome. The aim of the research undertaken is to identify the nature and degree of social danger of professional negligence in the diagnosis and treatment of diseases. The article analyzes statistical data characterizing the dynamics of bringing doctors and other medical workers to criminal responsibility for committing crimes that caused harm to the life and health of patients. The organic connection of iatrogenic crimes with defects in the quality of medical care and improper performance of professional duties by medical workers is argued. The author reveals the difference between the causes of death and deterioration in the health of persons seeking medical assistance, and analyzes the practice of termination of medical workers criminal prosecution on rehabilitating grounds. On the basis of materials of modern judicial practice, it is proved that there is no need to separate the category «iatrogenic crimes» in the criminal law. A differentiated approach to qualification of adverse treatment outcomes seems promising. The author proposes detailing the legal liability of medical workers and medical organizations, depending on the criminal or non-criminal nature of the circumstances of causing harm to the life and health of the patient.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL DELINQUENCY – CYBERSTALKING: CHARACTERISTICS OF OBJECT AND OBJECTIVE SIDE

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (83) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Uldis Ķinis
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Written Text ◽  
Legitimate Interest ◽  
International Regulations ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
First Time

On January 2018 significant amendments to the Criminal Law and the Law On the Procedure for Application of the Criminal Law came into force in Latvia. These changes not only in the first time introduce the criminal responsibility for the emotional violence, but also determine the procedure for assessing emotional disparity, equating the effects to telepathic injuries.In the article, the author reviews a modality of crime “persecution” - cyber-persecution. Although the legislator in the annotation of the law provides that the article also shall be applicable to acts committed in cyberspace, at the same time, the author indicates some problems that may arise due to the narrow interpretation of the law by the law enforcement. The purpose of the article is to study the object (protected legitimate interest) and the objective side (actus reus) of the offense - cyber-stalking. For purposes of research, several methods have been used. The method of comparative analysis, for examination and comparison of external and international regulations. Methods of legal interpretation used to disclose the differences between the understanding of the written text of the definition of the crime and what ought to be understood in the meaning of the norm. Finally, the author presents the conclusions and proposals on the application of the norm.

scholarly journals ASAS PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN TERHADAP KORPORASI YANG MELAKUKAN TINDAK PIDANA PERBANKAN

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Nurul Sasmita
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Sense Of Justice

The aims of this thesis is (1) to investigate andexplain the positions of corporations in conducting banking criminalacts, and (2) also to identify and explain the criminal responsibility ofbank as the perpetrator in banking criminal acts. This research isnormative, conceptual approach and the approach of legislationregarding responsibility principles of the corporation for banking criminalacts.Corporations have chances in committing a crime, especially bankingcriminal acts just by making a corporation recognized as a subject ofexistence apart from human beings, so that in practice there is a criminal offense committed by the corporation. The corporation takespart in the occurrence of a crime. In practice, the determination of acriminal offenseconducted by the corporation is known through two things: first, the works of the committee: they should be constructed as theyuse the principles of the liability of corporation’s criminal actions. Principally, stakeholders and officials or employees of a corporationhave the responsibility for its owncorporate actions; second, errors in the corporation,as long as it is in the science of criminal law, the overview of criminals is still oftenassociated with physical actions performed by the manufacturers(fysieke dader) but this can be overcome by the study of  "functionalactors" (functioneledader). We can prove that the action of committeeor employees of the corporation in the society act traffic concerned,the acts of the corporationerrors in the forms (dolus or culpa) must be regarded ascorporate faults.Towards the corporations that make banking criminal acts we canhave their responsibility with the principles of strict liability. Onthe principle of strict liability, it is known that the responsibility ison them even if they do not have the required mens rea. The substanceof this principle is that the perpetrator has been punished if theperpetrator may have provable conduct prohibited by the criminalprovision (actus reus) withoutsee the inner attitude. In this conception, the corporation is consideredhaving responsibility forphysical acts performed by management. A corporation convicted in principles isintended to develop a sense of justice in the corporation who commitsbanking criminal acts as stated in Article 46 paragraph (2), sothat if a corporation committed criminal acts, we can also have theresponsibility of the corporation. Keywords:Banking Criminal Acts, Corporation, ResponsibilityMenurut peraturan perundang-udangan, korporasi sebagai subyek hukum dapat dikenakan pidana sebagaimana manusia melakuka tindak pidana. Pada praktiknya, penentuan tindak pidana yang dilakukan oleh korporasi diketahui melalui dua hal, yaitu pertama tentang perbuatan pengurus yang harus dikonstruksikan sebagai perbuatan korporasimaka digunakanlah asas pertanggungjawaban pidana. Pada asas tersebut stakeholder maupun pengurus atau pegawai suatu korporasi, bertanggungjawab terhadap perbuatan korporasi itu sendiri. dan kedua tentang kesalahan pada korporasi, memang selama ini dalam ilmu hukum pidana gambaran tentang pelaku tindak pidana masih sering dikaitkan dengan perbuatan yang secara fisik dilakukan oleh pembuat (fysieke dader) namun hal ini dapat diatasi dengan ajaran “pelaku fungsional” (functionele dader). Kita dapat membuktikan bahwa perbuatan pengurus atau pegawai korporasi itu dalam lalu lintas bermasyarakat berlaku sebagai perbuatan korporasi yang bersangkutan maka kesalahan dalam bentuk (dolus atau culpa) mereka harus dianggap sebagai kesalahan korporasi. Terhadap korporasi yang melakukan tindak pidana perbankan dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban pidana dengan menggunakan asas strict liability.Pada asas strict liability diketahui bahwa pembebanan tanggung jawab pidana kepada pelakunya sekalipun pelakunya tidak memiliki mens rea yang dipersyaratkan. Adapun substansi dari asas ini adalah pelaku sudah dapat dijatuhi pidana apabila pelaku telah dapat dibuktikan melakukan perbuatan yang dilarang oleh ketentuan pidana (actus reus) tanpa melihat sikap batinnya. Dalam konsepsi ini, korporasi dianggap bertanggung jawab atas perbuatan yang secara fisik dilakukan oleh pengurus (direksi dan komisaris). Dipidananya korporasi pada asas ini dimaksudkan dapat menimbulkan rasa keadilan pada korporasi yang melakukan tindak pidana perbankan, sehingga apabila korporasi melakukan tindak pidana maka korporasi juga dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban.Kata kunci: Korporasi, Pertanggungjawaban, Tindak Pidana Perbankan

scholarly journals PROPERTY LIABILITY OF THE INVESTIGATOR IN THE REHABILITATION OF THE ACCUSED

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 899-903
Author(s):  
D.V. Tatianin
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Innocent Person ◽  
Investigation Process

The article addresses the issues of the investigator’s liability in deciding on the acquittal of the defendant to whom he or she has been charged and the criminal case was sent to the court with the indictment. The view is maintained that the investigator’s responsibility can only occur if the fact of bringing a knowingly innocent person to criminal responsibility is proved with the investigator playing an active role in the fabrication of criminal case materials. When a person is prosecuted on the basis of an assessment of the totality of the available evidence, which at the hearing did not find confirmation for various reasons, prosecuting an investigator seems unacceptable. The investigator investigates the crime in the context of a pronounced opposition to the investigation process from interested parties, the evidence base is created in the specified conditions, before the criminal case is sent to the court, participants in the process are exposed to various forms in order to obtain the necessary evidence from them. A change in the evidence system may be related to counteracting the investigation process, in this situation it is unacceptable for the investigator to be held accountable for unjustified criminal prosecution.

scholarly journals Inchoate aspects of Attempted Crimes: Revisiting Criminal Law for its effective Management

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2S7) ◽  
pp. 391-395
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Activity ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Effective Management ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
Element Approach

Actus Reus is known as the external element of the objective component of Criminal Law. Mens Rea, the guilty intention, determines the criminal responsibility. Mens Rea and Actus Reus both are the components of a criminal activity that determines the liability of the accused person. An action carried out in furtherance of criminal activity doesn’t become an attempted crime unless it is confirmed by the illegality for which it was conducted. An attempted crime is an action that reveals the illegal intention on its face. The aspects of a crime such as the Mens Rea, Actus Reus, intentional crime, unintentional act caused as a result of carelessness, motivates to indulge in violating the provisions of law. The four theories of law such as the rule of proximity, the test of unequivocally, the indispensable element approach and the test of social danger are the elements of a crime.

scholarly journals The offence/defence of infanticide: A view from two perspectives

2018 ◽  
Vol 82 (6) ◽  
pp. 470-481
Author(s):  
Helen Howard
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Postnatal Depression ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Medical Condition ◽  
Moral Agent ◽  
Theoretical Rationale ◽  
After Effects ◽  
The Status ◽  
Not Criminally Responsible ◽  
Women Who Kill

This article asks whether the time is right for abolition of the offence/defence of infanticide. To this end, a two-pronged approach is taken, examining infanticide initially as an offence, and then as a defence. In terms of the offence of infanticide, consideration is given both to the concept of the ‘infanticidal mother’ and to the status of infants below the age of 12 months. When considering the defence of infanticide, examination is made of the exclusive nature of the defence and of the scope for an individual to be a ‘partial’ moral agent. The contradictory nature of infanticide, being both inculpatory and exculpatory, suggests the need for a theoretical rationale that justifies disallowing the offence/defence to, inter alia, those women who kill their own children over 12 months and to men who suffer similar ‘environmental’ postnatal depression. It is suggested that women who kill their children while suffering from the ‘after-effects’ of childbirth are either, depending on the severity of mental disorder, fully competent and therefore criminally responsible (although perhaps entitled to a lesser sentence due to a reduction in culpability) or fully incompetent, therefore incurring no criminal responsibility at all. This proposal can be achieved by recognising that there is a place for reduced culpability or a complete absence of responsibility to fall within the current defence of diminished responsibility or within the Law Commission’s recommended alternative to the insanity defence of ‘not criminally responsible by reason of recognised medical condition’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document