Insanity Plea: A Retrospective Examination of the Verdict of 'Not Guilty on the Ground of Insanity'
American Bar Association; Society of Legal Scholars; Society of Editors, UK; University of Tennessee - Society for the Study of Social Problems (SSSP); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); United States Patent and Trademark Office; International Network to Promote the Rule of Law (INPROL); American Psychology-Law Association; United States National Institute of Justice; British Association of Women Police
ECGI - Law Working Paper
This paper argues that insanity should be eliminated as a separate defence, but that the effects of mental disorder should still carry significant moral weight in that mental illness should be relevant in assessing culpability only as warranted by general criminal law doctrines concerning mens rea, self-defence and duress. This study was triggered by the case R v. Central Criminal Court, ex parte Peter William Young. Peter Young had been charged with dishonestly concealing material facts contrary to s47 (1) Financial services Act 1986. The case considered Peter Young's intentions, not in relation to dishonesty, and not in relation to the purpose of the making of the representations, but as to the state of the defendant's intention in relation to the facts.
Keywords: criminal insanity, fraud, law
JEL Classification: K20Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: September 9, 2008 ; Last revised: September 20, 2008
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.297 seconds