Insanity Defense History

959 Words 4 Pages
For centuries, criminals have been categorized as insane, but does that justify their crime? The majority of higher profile criminals file for the insanity plea which then affects their punishment and life, causing us to consider if ours is safe.The insanity defense should not be admissible in court because of the interest for the public, increases in legal costs, and manipulation of the legal system.
The insanity defense’s history plays into our everyday legal actions and in order to understand the problem, you need to understand the defense. The insanity plea came about in the twelfth century, when it was originally meant to offer an excuse or reason for the crime to get a revised sentence rather than “not being found guilty” like we are
…show more content…
Professionals say that “Few defenses cause as much public outrage as the insanity defense” (The Insanity Defense). Due to the line between right and wrong, everyone is going to have a different stance on what type of punishment they should receive. Insanity defense trials have involved the public since they started because people are drawn to the controversial issues. It can also be dangerous to the public when criminals and citizens are treated in the same facility (both ill), because it could affect their treatment, and the effects would show. As long as criminals and mentally ill citizens are living in a community together, they may be influenced in a non-helpful way. It is not safe for them to interact and influence morals on each other, because it poses a danger to mentally ill citizens and their community they are released …show more content…
Not only would having alternatives greatly reduce cost, but it would also get rid of perks of manipulating the insanity plea. Merging the treatment of mentally ill criminals in penitentiaries would give criminals the aid they need, decrease trial and institution costs as well as having a better outcome for the public. The insanity defense is a useless defense that currently leads to excessive costs, danger towards the public, and manipulation of the legal system. There are no reasons it should be allowed in the courtroom with much more efficient alternative options out

Related Documents