Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
12 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Steps to prove insanity |
1. Defect of reason. 2. Disease of the mind 3. Not to know the nature/quality of the act Optional 4. Not to know the act is wrong. |
|
|
Defect of reason |
The defendant must be deprived of the power of reasoning. Mere absent mindedness or confusion is not enough. |
|
|
R v Clarke (1972) |
Defendant picked up a jar of mincemeat in a store and left without paying. Conviction quashed as she was deprived of the power of reasoning due to her depression. |
|
|
Disease of the mind |
Can be a physical or mental disease. |
|
|
R v Kemp (1956) |
Defendant suffered from hardening of arteries which caused problems supplying blood to the brain. Whilst losing consciousness briefly, he attacked his wife with a hammer and was charged with a S20 offence. |
|
|
R v Sullivan (1983) |
Defendant suffered from epilepsy and injured an 80 year old man whilst having a fit. House of Lords held that the source of the disease was irrelevant and so epilepsy fell within the legal definition of insanity. |
|
|
What was held in R v Sullivan (1983) regarding disease of the mind? |
The disease can be "organic or functional". It doesn't matter if the impairment was "permanent or transient and intermittent", as long as it existed at the time of doing the act. |
|
|
Not to know the nature/quality of the act |
The defendant must be unaware of the nature/quality of his act. |
|
|
Ways in which the defendant can be unaware of the nature/quality of his act |
1. They are in a state of unconsciousness or impaired consciousness; OR 2. They are conscious but unaware of what they're doing due to their medical condition. |
|
|
R v Hennessy (1989) |
Defendant was diabetic who had not taken his insulin for 3 days. Stole and car and charged with taking a motor vehicle without consent and driving whilst disqualified. Held that even though the defendant was conscious, he was unaware of what he was doing due to his diabetes and so fell within the legal definition of insanity. |
|
|
OPTIONAL: To not know that the act is wrong |
If the defendant knows the act is legally wrong, then insanity is NOT allowed, even if all the other points of the M'Naughton (1843) rules are satisfied. |
|
|
R v Windle (1952) |
Defendant suffered from a mental illness and gave his wife 100 aspirins because she constantly spoke about suicide. When handing himself in, he said "I suppose they will hang me for this", indicating that despite he had a mental illness, he knew what he did was legally wrong, and so insanity was not available. |
