What is insanity? When is a person considered insane? What should society do if an “insane” person commits a felony? These questions have perplexed society for many years. What the insanity defense does, is try to give these people a fair trial. At least in extreme cases, people agree with this principle. The problem is where do we draw the line. Under what circumstances is a person considered insane, and when are they not? One important point that you must understand is that the crime itself, no matter how atrocious, does not demonstrate insanity. Ever since this had become a major issue within the boundaries of the legal system, lawyers, physicians, and psychologist have long struggled to establish a clear and acceptable definition of insanity. Insanity is a legal term, not a psychological or medical one. One of the oldest, and perhaps the most famous definitions of the term insanity was the M’Naghten rule, written in Britain in 1843. To be regarded as insane under the M’Naghten rule, people must be so disordered that they do not realize they are committing a criminal act. Under the Durham rule, established in 1954, stated that a defendant is not criminally responsible if the activity was “a product of mental disease or defect.” Then, in the 1950s, the Model Penal Code was written to clarify the definition of insanity. It stated that: A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality (wrongfulness) of his conduct or to confirm his conduct to the requirements of law. (Shapiro, 1985)The insanity plea is raised in no more than two percent of felony cases and the defense is rarely successful when the question is contested in a jury trial. If the defendant is clearly out of touch with reality, the police and district attorney ordinarily agree to bypas...
