Is Pleading Insanity a ‘Get out of Jail Free’ Card?

research must take place, but also in practice by responding to the impacts of challenges in a suitable manner advocating for justice and reform.

Is Pleading Insanity a ‘Get out of Jail Free’ Card?

By Hayat Alibhai, Year 12 North London Collegiate School Dubai

Pleading innocent by reason of insanity is a practice originating back in the 1840’s, a practice is recognised as an excuse defence rather than a justification defence. The English court recognised insanity as “the witness who do not have reason whereby they can choose the good from the evil”. As clearly that definition would lack sufficient detail in modern day, the definition of an insane criminal is one that admits ownership of the crime(s) but lacks culpability due to their mental illness.

If a criminal chooses to plead insanity, a psychiatric exam must be conducted prior to the trial through government paid forensic psychologists. Ideally, psychiatrists are forbidden to assert their opinion on whether they believe the criminal was in a state of mental insanity at the time of committing the crime, that burden falls upon the defendant. Psychiatrists are only limited to providing a mental medical

diagnosis at the time of the trial. But, how sure can one be that the criminal was undergoing mental anguish at the time of the crime?

The M’Naghten defence plea is one of the four pleas that may appeal for pleading innocent by reason of insanity, which requires the criminal to be diagnosed with a mental defect or disease in conjugation with an inability to know that the action was illegal or wrong. For example, Person X is suffering from a severe form of multiple personality disorder and therefore harms their child due to their multiple personality taking control of their mind. The child loses excessive amounts of blood and is now pronounced dead due to blood loss. Person X later files a police report saying that they harmed their child when experiencing a personality switch but, in that moment, did not recognise its repercussions. By law, person X is viable to plea insanity by the M’Naghten defence plea, however, to what extent does mental health overshadow our ability to control impulses? The American Bar Association often refers to the

M’Naghten defence plea as a defence when you have no other option. The mockery made of this plea is indicative of the reputation it has.

Baltimore defence attorney Cristina Gutierrez argues that these cases are simply for show and publicity as they are “crimes that are bizarre within themselves”. The principal argument is answering the question of whether the criminal was aware of their wrong-doings at the time? The ambiguity of the requirements of this plea make it an emotional based argument, one that a defendant can easily argue that the accused is insane, and in an environment such as the court room, where emotion is an integral part of being a lawyer, one can simply convince the judge that insanity is the route of this case.

Additionally, the limitation of the psychiatrist, the professional in this situation, being unable to comment on whether they believe the criminal was experiencing a mental episode is baffling. Following the Hippocratic oath, that limits psychiatrists from imposing one’s personal beliefs, shouldn’t the mental health profession be able to comment on whether the accused is guilty or not, from a medical perspective? The prime responsibility of a lawyer is to argue their side, even with limited evidence, and placing the responsibility of convincing the judge that the accused is insane on them is irrational and absurd. The law itself utilises the words “wrong” and “know”. The word “wrong” has moral implications, posing the question of is wrong a moral or legal obligation? If a person is suffering from a severe mental illness, does that necessarily mean that their cognitive function is the sole reason as to why they would commit such a

crime? Are mental health patients exempt from experiencing will and emotion?

Pleading insane is not a get out of jail free card, but it is one of the many questionable methods of where the law attempts to deal with medical issues.