The Insanity Defense
The Insanity Defense
Chapter 8 addresses the insanity defense, its lengthy and controversial history, its basic threads and iterations, its evolution over time, the current tests employed, and the lack of consensus regarding what the relevant standard should be. This chapter also describes the rationale for and opposition to the defense—although most seem to agree that at least under some circumstances a defendant’s mental status at the time of the crime is a factor that should be relevant during subsequent criminal proceedings—and various widely-held myths regarding its prevalence, use, and impact. The chapter begins with descriptions of a series of notorious cases where an insanity defense was raised or widely thought to have been raised. For better or for worse, these cases have generally shaped the public’s perception of this defense. The chapter ends with an account of the single U.S. Supreme Court ruling that directly addressed whether the insanity tests currently employed are subject to constitutional scrutiny.
Keywords: insanity defense, history, controversy, rationale, myths, notorious cases, Clark v Arizona
NYU Press Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.
