Mental Condition Defences In The Criminal Law

Criminal law has struggled to keep pace with developments in psychiatry, both in substantive and procedural terms, and it is widely recognised that increased inter-disciplinary discussion of mental condition defences is required in order to address this gap between the law and psychiatry. This edited collection comes at a time of review of this sensitive area of criminal law. The Law Commission for England and Wales recently placed its evaluation of insanity, automatism and intoxication on hold, while it considers the law on unfitness to plead. These reviews are set against the backdrop of earlier Law Commission reports on partial defences to murder which informed significant changes that were made to the law in this area under sections 52–56 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. Recent developments in case law in this substantive area illustrate not only the importance of the role of the medical expert, but also that reform in this area is informed by ongoing inter-disciplinary research. This collection brings together medical and legal conceptions of mental disorder in order to appraise the operation of mental condition defences. In this respect, it provides invaluable and original insights into mental condition defences and criminal law.

Mental condition defences have been used in several high profile and controversial criminal trials in recent years. Indeed, mental abnormality is increasingly an important yet complex course of defence within the criminal trial process. In this timely study, Professor Mackay offers a detailed critical analysis of these defences within the Criminal Law where the accused relies on some form of mental abnormality as a source of defence/negotiation. Topics covered include the defences of automatism, insanity, diminished responsibility and infanticide; self-induced incapacity and the doctrine of fault. It also includes a chapter on unfitness to plead, which although not a defence has been included because of its important relationship to mental disorder within the criminal process. Drawing upon a wide variety of legal, psychiatric and philosophical sources, this is a timely contribution to a controversial and complex topic.

More than any other defence in the criminal law, the insanity defence has, and continues to be, the subject of heated debate. Yet too little is known about how the insanity defence operates in different jurisdictions, including in the United Kingdom and Ireland. In this book, Mackay and Brookbanks, and their team of expert contributors, explore the theory and practice around the insanity defence and analyse its diverse influence and manifestations across a wide range of common law and civil law jurisdictions. Typically, the insanity defence, as exemplified in the M'Naghten Rules, represents a foundational aspect of criminal responsibility, although in some jurisdictions it serves only to define degrees of mental capacity. However, what all jurisdictions have in common is the high and increasing incidence of mental illness and impairment challenging existing constructions of an exculpatory rule. This book explores in detail the origins and operation of the M'Naghten Rules as well as the eclectic nature of the insanity defence, its highly variable linguistic expression, and the diverse social policy mandates it seeks to embrace. The Insanity Defence will reinvigorate the debate about the defence by discussing both its theoretical basis and exploring how different jurisdictions approach the insanity plea, not only in relation to an appropriate test and how it operates, but also from the perspective of disposal and how those who use the insanity defence successfully are dealt with. This book will be of interest to researchers, academics, and advanced students with an interest in criminal law internationally, as well as to those involved in the development of policy and legislation.

First Published in 2002. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

The law relating to general defences is one of the most important areas in the criminal law, yet the current state of the law in the United Kingdom reveals significant problems in the adoption of a consistent approach to their doctrinal and theoretical underpinnings, as exemplified by a number of recent developments in legislation and case law. A coherent and joined-up approach is still missing. This volume provides an analysis of the main contentious areas in British law, and proposes ways forward for reform. The collection includes contributions from leading experts across various jurisdictions. Part I examines the law in the United Kingdom, with specialist contributions on Irish and Scottish law. Part II consists of contributions by authors from a number of foreign jurisdictions, all written to a common research grid for maximum comparability, which provide a wider background of how other legal systems treat problems relating to general defences in the context of the criminal law, and which may serve as points of reference for domestic law reform.

This book challenges the assumptions of modern criminal law that insanity is a natural, legally and medically defined phenomenon (covering a range of medical disorders). By doing so, it paves the way for a new perspective on insanity and can serve as the basis for a new approach to insanity in modern criminal law. The book covers the following aspects: the structure of the principle of fault in modern criminal law, the development of the insanity defense in criminal law, tangential in personam defenses in criminal law and their implications for insanity and the legal mechanism of reproduction of fault. The focus is on the Anglo-American and European-Continental legal systems. Given the attention consistently drawn by international and domestic events in this context, the book will be of interest to a broad and growing international audience.

Whether the accused is competent to stand trial, whether the plaintiff is competent to accuse, or whether a witness is competent to testify has had a long legal history. Such questions draw legal reasoning into areas of ethical reflection and scientific debate deeply rooted in the moral history of the United States. Mental competence has come to play a central and controversial role in proving guilt, and in evaluating the severity of a crime and its corresponding punishment. This compendium brings together the major legal precedents and legal commentaries that have defined the role of mental illness in criminal trials throughout U.S. history. The reprint collection considers, among other issues, the evolution of the Supreme Court's position on the insanity defense and mental retardation, how these affect one's competency to stand trial or be executed, and how these affect culpability and punishment. Each volume begins with an introductory essay, and includes both cases and commentary. Scholars as well as students will find these volumes a useful research tool.