the police that he knew his actions were wrong. This case led to Kendra's Law, passed in November 1999. This was a New York State law concerning involuntary outpatient commitment also known as assisted outpatient treatment. It granted judges the authority to issue orders that require people who meet certain criteria to regularly undergo psychiatric treatment, in order to prevent horrific cases similar to Goldstein’s in the future.
Should Mentally Ill Individuals Who Commit Crimes be Referred to Psychiatric Treatment or Should They Be Punished? Katie Darbari
The main purpose of legislation is to maintain safety and order within our society, which is the key issue which the public is concerned with. However, there are some exceptions which may contradict common law order, for example could we accept the possibility that a person who commits a crime could be exempt through mental illness? Although this outcome may be legally possible if the mental state of the patient has improved, potential danger and threats to public safety remain primary concerns. There is no easy solution to this dilemma. Majoritively, this is dependent on specific cases, and there are certain instances where a mentally ill individual who commits a crime (sometimes even a serious crime) can be hospitalized and eventually discharged. An example of this is seen in 1999, in the case of People v Goldstein. Goldstein was a patient with a history of schizophrenia. He had pushed a woman he had never met onto the New York City subway tracks in front of an oncoming train, causing her death. Previously, he had been discharged from the hospital against his will. The jurors determined that he was mentally ill but guilty, because he understood the nature and meaning of his actions, and because he told
Another famous case was the Trial of Arne Cheyenne Johnson. Please see the previous page titled ‘Case Study: The Devil Made Me Do It’ for further information. Martin Minnella, Johnson’s defence attorney, cited two British court cases that had permitted a defence based on possession by demons, but Judge Robert Callahan refused the tactic, stating such assertions could not be scientifically or objectively proven by evidence. Minnella argued self-defence instead. The jury found Johnson guilty of first-degree manslaughter on November 24, 1981. He received a sentence of 10 to 20 years, of which he served 5, for good behaviour. This case was a turning point and was widely discussed as the insanity defence with possession was rarely heard of. These cases today bring up many legal issues, as there are such fine lines between distinguishing which cases would be eligible in pleading insanity as a defence. In the USA there are still many mentally ill individuals in the prisons, perhaps even suggesting a positive correlation between the two, (including those incarcerated under circumstances like the New York case described earlier). This raises the question as to which is the desirable situation, hospitality or incarceration? Today, there is more emphasis placed on the examination of the relationship between the crime and psychotic content, but there is no longer an automatic exemption from responsibility for a criminal who has a chronic psychiatric illness such as schizophrenia or possession in the case of People vs Goldstein or the Trial of Arne Cheyenne Johnson.
7
