It is easy to believe that any rapist, murderer, pedophile, armed robber or violent criminal is insane. Obviously, they must have a few screws loose if they are able to maim and kill without remorse. Legal insanity, however, is much different from the psychological definition, and it is important for juries and even the general public to understand the distinction.
In order for a criminal to be punished for his or her crimes, the prosecutor must establish at trial that he or she possessed the mental capacity to justify intent. In other words, he or she set out to commit a crime, then followed through with it. Without intent, a crime is not considered a crime at all, though the perpetrator will likely serve time in a mental institution until physicians declare he or she capable of returning to society. This is the premise for legal insanity, which is very difficult to prove.
Although each state has its own definition of legal insanity, the main basis for this defense is fairly universal. In order to prove that a criminal was legally insane, the defense must establish that a mental disease or defect rendered him or her incapable of appreciating the nature and consequences of his or her actions.
For example, a murderer diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia might fit the definition of legal insanity if he committed his crime because the voices in his head convinced him that the victim was a threat to his life. The victim might not have presented any such threat, but because he genuinely believed it to be true, he can’t be held responsible for his actions.
In many cases, legal insanity is determined as a result of a 730 exam, which is ordered by the courts. This examination, which is conducted by a state-appointed psychologist, can determine whether or not the defendant is capable of standing trial for his crimes, or to determine if an insanity defense has any merit in a court of law.
However, legal insanity can also be established by the defense in court with a psychologist of the attorney’s choosing. It is then up to the jury to determine whether the prosecutor or the defense is correct by weighing the testimony by both the government psychologist and the private one.
Over the years, legal insanity has been used in many high-profile cases, including the prosecution of John Hinckley subsequent to his attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan. He was successful in this defense, but since that case, most states have cracked down on the definition of legal insanity, and have narrowed the scope of mental diseases and defects that can be used in a court of law.
Legal insanity has been the subject of much public and legal scrutiny because it is often a source of jury nullification and because it is possible for a talented liar to fake insanity and get away with his crimes. Although psychologists are highly trained to detect even the slightest whiff of deception, there are certainly criminals who have slipped through the cracks.
Additionally, legal insanity is often abused by defense attorneys when trying their last desperate measures to get their clients acquitted for their crimes. Since insanity is technically a ‘not-guilty’ verdict, despite the fact that the defendant is subsequently remanded to a mental facility for treatment, he or she can be released as soon as doctors are satisfied of recovery.
As an affirmative defense, legal insanity is a gamble, but many defense attorneys are more than willing to risk it. If one criminal is let off because of a mental disease or defect not previously used in court, it sets a precedent for future crimes of the same nature. For example, road rage is now considered a mental defect by many psychologists, but if a defendant were acquitted for vehicular manslaughter on the basis of legal insanity, it could have terrible repercussions.
Nevertheless, legal insanity has its basis in U.S. law because there are people who genuinely need treatment rather than punishment. Placing a mentally ill patient in a prison, defenseless, is considered cruel and unusual, and although the victims of violent crime perpetrated by the mentally ill never truly receive justice, the law affords some protection.
