This was later carried out through twenty-six other states, including the U.S., which created a precedent against the execution of the mentally ill in 1986. Even though the mentally ill cannot be executed, if the person who claimed mental illness is no longer mentally ill he or she can be executed. While the insanity plea proves that some criminals are mentally unstable, it should be used with caution because many convicted criminals abuse it during court cases, imitate being mentally ill during an examination, and are able to avoid the death penalty. Despite that the insanity plea can potentially help someone in defense for a mental illness case, many people can also take advantage of these precedents to alleviate their trials. The public in most insanity plea cases, do not typically agree with the rulings because most criminals use the
A huge advantage is that this here defense when successful can save a life, in which it can avoid a defendant from being put on death row. When a defendant pleas insanity, in the courtroom it creates an insanity atmosphere of guilt. When a defendant pleas insanity, the attorney admits that the crimes happen, but the defendant is innocent because of his or her mind (Samaha, 2015). By having a successful insanity defense, this can cause for the defendant to have a lenient charge when the jury reaches the verdict.
The insanity plea is one of the most controversial and problematic defense strategies used in court cases. It becomes so problematical when someone determines the sanity of a person, because where does the line cross from insane and sane. The insanity plea is the least common mechanism that defendants and lawyers use as a plea. Sometimes it is accurate and the defendant is treated properly in a mental institute for awhile; whereas in other cases it is used as “get out of jail free card. ”
It can be considered as an option for certain cases but other more effective measures should be considered to tackle the problem regarding the aggressive behaviours of prison inmates. The patient (the prisoner) should have a say in whether or not he/she wants to take the medication or choose to participate in other rehabilitation methods such as counselling. Imprisonment should not be seen as a punishment, but rather is a way for people to change for
People may start to lose trust in the justice system in meting out fair and impartial judgements, resulting in a total disregard of the justice system. In the contexts of crimes carrying the death penalty, jury tampering can have serious ramifications. The irreversible damage done to the accused’s family due to the wrongful convictions cannot be fixed with any sum of money. With Singapore’s strict anti-corruption stance, cases of corrupt judges would hence be rare. Although one might argue that cases of jury tampering would also be low as a result, it is worth noting that juries may be influenced in ways that do not
It also had an effect on society with the growing numbers of people who were admitted into the alcohol wards of the hospitals. This affected families because now people who wanted to drink had to do it illegally and many got put in jail if they got caught. This made police officers jobs more difficult because the people who wanted to drink had to do it illegally, and the cops were cracking down. It opened up opportunities for organized crime to start manufacturing and distributing of liquor, while making millions of dollars along the way. All of a sudden drinking was illegal.
A prisoner can be sent into isolation if they have commited a serious crime like killing another inmate or creating a fight or even assaulting a guard. Sometimes inmates are placed in solitary confinement because they need protection from other people—but is it really protection if they end up with a mental illness? Now listen to this, many inmates in solitary confinement aren’t in there because they have committed a serious crime, but because they have simply upset the guards and broken minor
To continue agitating the process in recurring prisoners back into the penitentiary for the reason of state’s incapability to encounter the request for treatment that drugs has caused being that the expense is detrimental of impartiality. Olson (2014) indicates that treating a habit as a transgression rather than a physical condition issue, complexes the adverse impression on human beings and communities in relations of community health and protection. Additionally, some criminals arise from being released from the penitentiary with crude substance habit condition, however offenders are most likely to be displayed of numerous transmissible illnesses while in prison. In efforts to absorb illicit performances that dishearten social responsibility,
Prisons that are over populated cause inmates to disturb one another causing many problems due to the fact that prisons are rising just by the number of inmates they have. Judges who walk through prisons often find that they are roughly crowded, they say that if prisons have too many prisoners they should lower the sentencing of an inmate. An increased amount of cellmates can become a threat to the prison employees and prisoners themselves. Inmates can cause fights and riots which may result in hurting others, including guards. Sometimes, death is an inevitable outcome.
A case can be changed due to the call of the insanity plea. Nevertheless, This may cause a possible difference to the charge of the defence. In a court case dealing with murder such as the issue with the Clutter family, the Insanity plea was brought into thought to test if Perry and Dick were mentally stable during that time. By definition, the insanity plea is an argument stating the defense was not responsible for their actions due to a psychiatric disease at the time of the act, consequently, making him/her unaware of the occurring actions moreover the later consequences. In the book, In Cold Blood by Truman Capote, the main characters Perry and Dick killed the Clutter family committing the crime of the century.
Insanity Defense The insanity defense has the notion that some individuals are mentally disturbed that they are unable to understand their actions and it would be a violation to hold them responsible. Smith states that the insanity defense is a plea used by the defense to show lack of mental potential of a person when committing a crime. (Smith, 2012)
If an insanity plea is successful, it can be implied that mental illnesses can be dangerous or harmful. Also, that the person with the mental illness is going to be treated and hopefully learn how to handle such an illness. Then perhaps that person can go free after a while. On the other hand, if an insanity plea is unsuccessful, then it can be implied that the person with the illness may not get treatment. Although, if the person is just using a mental illness as an excuse, then he or she is giving other people with a mental illness a bad name.
I represent the Crown and am seeking a guilty verdict for Thomas Dudley and Edwin Stephens, who were involved in the brutal murder of defenceless Richard Parker. To prove the verdict of not guilty, the accused are invoking the Defence of Necessity as a means of justification for their thoughtless actions, which is inapplicable to this case. In order for the defendants to be proven not guilty, all three components of the Defence of Necessity must be satisfied. The first component of the Defence of Necessity states, “there must be an urgent situation of clear and imminent peril”.
How fair is the “insanity” defense? Davis (2016) argued that the used of the “insanity” defense may be seen by others as unfair to other criminals because of the leniency towards one group of criminals and not others. This can be seen as discrimination towards individuals with mental illness.