Upgrade to remove ads
Chapter 9: The Insanity Defense
Terms in this set (29)
Meaning "guilty act". The physical act of committing a crime.
An aspect of a case in which a defendant bears the burden of proof in a trial, such as for proving insanity.
The definition of insanity proposed by the American Law Institute which states "a person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform to the requirements of the law".
Burden of Proof
In a court of law, the duty of one party to prove affirmatively the facts of its side.
Clear and Convincing Evidence Standard
A standard of proof between the less demanding standard of preponderance of evidence and the more demanding standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. It requires that the truth of issue be highly probably and is used only in a minority of civil cases.
Experts in the study and treatment of various forms of psychological disfunction and mental illness.
An insanity test based on a person's ability to distinguish right from wrong in committing acts.
The theory that instilling fear of punishment in people will prevent future criminal acts.
Impaired mental functions that prevent the afflicted person from having the required mens rea or mental state for certain crimes.
Durham Standard/Product Test
An insanity standard under which the defendant is not held criminally liable if the crime was caused by a mental illness.
First Degree Murder
The highest charge of homicide requiring that the perpetrator engaged knowingly in the premeditated killing of another human being.
The theory that punishing an offender will prevent other similarly situated individuals from committing future illegal acts because they have learned that the crime leads to punishment.
Guilty But Mentally Ill
An alternative verdict in which the defendant is found guilty of the crime and sentenced to prison with treatment for his or her mental health problems.
The 1983 trial of John Hinckley for the attempted murder of President Ronald Reagan. The court used the AIL standard for determining whether the defendant should be found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). Because the burden of proof for showing insanity rested on the prosecution, instead of the defense, Hinckley was found NGIR. Public outcry led to the 1984 Insanity Defense Reform Act.
The legal concept referring to the criminal's state of mind at the time the crime was committed. It requires that due to a mental illness a defendant lacks moral responsibility and culpability for the crime and therefore should not be punished.
Insanity Defense Reform Act (IDRA)
The federal law passed after the Hinckley trial that required that there be a presumption of sanity and that defendants prove by clear and convincing evidence that they were insane at the time of the crime.
Involuntary Manslaughter/Second Degree Murder
A charge of homicide that requires a lesser intent to kill.
An insanity defense in which the defendant's mental condition inhibited the ability to control his or her actions at the time of the offense even though the defendant may have known the act was wrong.
The most common insanity standard in the United States. It consists of three components (1) a presumption that defendants are sane and responsible for their crime (2) a requirement that at the time of the crime the accused must have been laboring under a defective reason or from disease of the mind and (3) a requirement that the defendant did now know the nature and quality of the act he was doing or if he did know it that he did now know what he was doing was wrong.
Meaning "guilty mind". Different crimes require different levels of mental awareness and understanding.
Mens Rea Defense
A case presented by the defense that concedes the defendant committed the crime (actus reus) but argues that the defendant lacked the requisite mental awareness and intent.
Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (NGIR)
An affirmation defense that suggests that the defendant because of his or her insanity should not be held criminally responsible.
Policeman at the Elbow Test
A volitional insanity test requiring that the defendant's impulse had to be so overwhelming that he or she would have committed the crime even if a police officer stood beside the defendant at the time of the crime.
A perspective on punishment that suggests punishment of a crime should be proportionate to the harm caused. It is intended to make the harmed party feel that justice has been served by punishing the perpetrator.
The theory that punishing an individual offender dissuades that person from committing future illegal acts because he or she should learn that crime will lead to punishment.
Specific Intent Crime
Crimes that require a specific mens rea for specific criminal prosecution. The specific intent can be: premeditation, intent, knowledge, gross negligence, or negligence.
The 1978 defense of Dan White against two charges of murder. His defense argued that his mental state was badly impaired by a deep depression exacerbated by his heavy intake of junk food.
Part of the ALI insanity standard in which the defendant's ability to control his or her actions at the time of the offense are examined.
Wild Beast Test
A test used historically to determine if a person is insane. It defines insanity as a mental deficiency in understanding and memory and asks whether a defendant acted like a wild beast.
THIS SET IS OFTEN IN FOLDERS WITH...
Chapter 5: Criminal Profiling and Psychological Au…
Chapter 6: Jury Selection
Chapter 7: Eyewitness Identification and Testimony
Chapter 8: Competency to Stand Trial
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
Ch. 9 Insanity
Chapter 9 - the Insanity Defense
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
PSY 302 Exam 2
PSY 216 Exam 2
PSY 302 Exam 1
PSY 216 Exam 1