HideShow resource information
  • Created by: Amy Baron
  • Created on: 13-01-13 11:45
View mindmap
  • Criticisms - Insanity (M'Naghten Rules)
    • Overlaps with..
      • Automotism
        • Created uncertainty and inconsisteny
          • Overreliance on Exernal Factor theory too
      • Diminished Responsibility (in murder only)
        • Partial defence, preferred = less stigma
    • Legal definition    not     medical
      • Not medically insane can be legally insane
        • Burgess, Hennessy, Bratty
      • Mentally ill cannot use insanity
        • Windle, Johnson
          • Because they knew they were doing WRONG.
            • Doesn't allow for irresistible      impulses
            • Emphasis of legality on this is too narrow
    • Outdated (1843)
      • Ignores modern scientific knowledge
      • Parliament need to review law and update definition
        • Hurtful and  negative stereotype = stigma
    • Conflicts with...
      • Human Rights Act 1998
        • Protection of society at the expense of D
          • European Convention on Human Rights
      • European Convention on Human Rights
    • Burden of proof on defence
      • Risk of violations of presumption of innocence (6.2 ECHR)
        • Only general defence = unfair
      • Jury
        • Lay body listen to and act on complex medical evidence = fair?
      • Commonwealth countries
        • E.g Canada and Australia vary greatly in the way they deal with insanity i.e wrong = morally


    No comments have yet been made

    Similar Law resources:

    See all Law resources »See all Law of Tort resources »