Case Of Not Criminally Responsible On Account Of Mental Dilemma

Improved Essays
For an individual to be blameworthy and criminally responsible for their actions, the accused person must have committed the actus reus and the mens rea. In the case of the accused pleading Not Criminally Responsible on Account of Mental Disorder (NCRMD), the court focuses on whether the accused had the mens rea while committing the alleged offence (Verdun-Jones, 2015). If the accused person did not know what he or she was doing was wrong, or did not appreciate the conduct or omission, the accused will not be found criminally responsible (Verdun-Jones, 2015). Overall, if the accused is found NCRMD, he or she will most likely be apprehended in the hospital, or supervised in the community to keep the citizens safe from a possible reoccurring …show more content…
In the R v. Chaulk (1990) case they realized that the meaning of wrong in this section is a reasonable moral standard set by the community (O’Doherty, week 8, 28 Oct 2016). For the defence of NCRMD to be successful, Anastasia would have to prove that her mental disorder caused her to make a morally wrong conduct. She has to know that society views that action as morally wrong (Verdun-Jones, 2015). Another case that the court should refer to is Regina v. Oommen (1994). In this case, the court found that Oommen was normally able to distinguish right and wrong. However, his mental disorder caused him to kill his victim. The main issue is whether the mental disorder stopped Oommen from making a rational decision between right and wrong, and whether his perception stopped him from making a rational decision. He was compelled to kill his victim because of his delusions. With this in mind, Anastasia also believed that Christian was a threat to her life. The mental disorder that Anastasia possess distorted her ability to distinguish between right and wrong during her psychosis episode, which ultimately lead to her killing Christian. Therefore the accused was unable to differentiate between right and wrong during the prohibited conduct and make a rational decision because of her mental disorder. As a result, Anastasia would have to prove on the balance of …show more content…
New provisions in Criminal Code require review boards in every province and territory under section 672.38 (Criminal Code, 1992). The review board or the court determines whether the accused’s case is an absolute discharge, conditional discharge or an accused person is held in psychiatric facility under section 672.54 of the Criminal Code (Criminal Code, 2014). Absolute discharge is when the accused is found guilty but there is no conviction and no conditions. Whereas conditional discharge is when the accused is given conditions to follow (Verdun-Jones, 2015). The accused must not been a major threat to the safety of the society to be sentence with absolute discharge. Anastasia must be given the charge with the least restriction and least burdensome (O’Doherty, week 8, 28 Oct 2016). However, if Anastasia is seen as a major threat to the public, the review board or the court has two options: They may discharge the accused with certain conditions that the review board will deem mandatory, or the accused with the NCRMD, will be kept in a hospital with conditions that the review board believes is important (Verdun-Jones, 2015). In this case, Anastasia is not a major threat to society since she is responding

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    The Insanity Defense

    • 1935 Words
    • 8 Pages

    West 's Encyclopedia of American Law, explains the Durham rule, “an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease." It required a jury 's determination that the accused was suffering from a mental disease and that there was a causal relationship between the disease and the act.” The "Irresistible Impulse" Test came after the M’Naughten rule. This does not only test cognitive, but how well one can resist impulse. To prove the impulse test is to first identify if there is mental illness, then to see if the mental illness caused the lack to control or actions to conform to law and society. This test can help the court consider who needs help or if it just an ordinary criminal.…

    • 1935 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Does Canada comply with the right not to testify against oneself or confess guilt? The Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada is a bill of rights that guarantees the rights and freedoms of Canadian citizens from the policies and and actions of all levels of government (the Charters). Section 7, 11, and 13 of the Charter protects guilty as well as innocent individuals when accused of a crime. It allows cizitens to remain silent and not testify against oneself during an interrogation process. The Charter provides protection to a person from being compelled to become a witness against themselves in a criminal case as well as making it difficult for the government to convict a person for an offence against the law.…

    • 2463 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    We then realized that the difference between this case and the rest of our cases was that for Spare Parts Surgeon, we would have to kill someone to save the five which we found to be morally wrong. After coming to this conclusion we altered our moral principle P. Thus our principle P’ became, when faced with a choice between acting in such a way that harm befalls few or many, act in such a way that harm befalls the fewest possible, provided that doing…

    • 1473 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In medico-legal cases, consent of the victim is necessary for examination and absence of legally effective consent is an essential element of crime. If legally effective consent is given, the application of force on part of the doctor would be lawful. 2. When plaintiff is the wrongdoer: This defence is based on the maxim ‘Ex turpi causa non oritur actio’ which means ‘no action rises from an immoral cause’. So, when the action of the plaintiff is unlawful itself, it might lead to a defence in general.…

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Petitioner also challenged the logic of the government’s argument that the jury instruction constituted plain error. For Petitioner, if the error was so egregious, the government should have objected at trial. Indeed, in other contexts, appellate courts applied the plain error doctrine to legal questions that were contested at the underlying trial, not in situations where there was no objection, and therefore no dispute, between the parties. In support of this argument, Petitioner analogized to the Court’s precedent in the Double Jeopardy context. Petitioner noted that the “the plainness and even egregiousness of an error in adding an extra-statutory element is of no moment for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause where an acquittal was…

    • 1083 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Third Party Omissions

    • 1016 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Firstly, the essay looked at the category of actions, where the defendant agrees to act or voluntarily accepts a responsibility, but later fails to do so. It is argued that this category demonstrates assumption of responsibility as fair because taking upon a responsibility, voluntary or contractually renders one to rely upon that person to deliver that specific care. If one could later fail to carry out the responsibility and this omission caused harm, it would not deter people from committing such torts if one was not imposed with liability. Secondly, the category of special relationships has been conceded here to be fair, as having that proximity and causing an omission is not right or justifiable.…

    • 1016 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 constitutes that a suspect has the right to not answer questions before, during and after the interview. Nevertheless, this might not be a procedural challenge to the interrogators, as silence can infer suspicion and this following can be used as evidence against the suspect, too . Andrew Ashworth evokes that ' 'one problem with adverse inferences is that they put pressure on suspect to talk . This might lead to innocent people confessing to something that did not commit and subsequently incriminate…

    • 1001 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Moral positions are only valid if they come from Dworkin’s qualifications of what is justifiable, (Dyzenhaus, Dworkin, 394). Dworkin’s argument is a resolution to the issues that surrounds a society who allow unjust acts based on a consensus of the reasonable men. For example women and African American’s not being allowed to vote. The reasonable man casts moral judgments on them based on his belief that they deserve less respect and in turn less rights, (Dyzenhaus, Dworkin, 395). This for Devlin would be enough to constitute legal action for public morality.…

    • 1204 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    (Railton 795) The Pyrrhonian model is much more plausible attempt at defining moral skepticism because unique individuals possess to distinct worldviews. Arguments arise because people can’t reach compromises on various issues. By using Pyrrhoian skepticism the individuals defines what is moral using their own judgments. People should not be dictated by what they are told is right and just because it is quite plausible that they are being deceived. While one cannot ever assume that any moral claim is a truth, modest justification can be provided by consideration of contrast classes.…

    • 1131 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Argument Against Cardoza

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Here I confine myself to the first branch of the definition. Nor do I comment on the word "unreasonable." For present purposes it sufficiently describes that average of conduct that society requires of its members.” (Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.) The duty of care should not only extend to those the guard’s act would expect to injure, but anyone who was injured. The person who did the wrongdoing should be liable for the proximate results of his actions.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays