This is the loophole that both side tried to exploit during both the initial trial and the re-trial. No one questions the claim that Yates was mentally ill, either before or during the events that took place. However, in the trial, the decision and weight of prosecution's case lied in the ideal that she had some semblance of knowledge that what she was about to do was wrong. Her mental

That is particularly important in connection with criminally insane defendants whose mental conditions are treatable but dependent on the individual's maintaining a prescription drug regimen. For example, it is an individual suffering from a known mental condition that qualifies for the criteria of criminal insanity may be able to control that condition by following his physicians' orders for prescription medication and then simply stop taking the medication. It is

Ethical Issues With the Insanity Defense Ethical Issues w / Insanity Defense The insanity defense may seem to have a distinct and real place in the legal world. However, defining who is insane, who is not insane, what the definition of insanity is, whether insanity is temporary or permanent, who should be liable and when and so forth are all burning questions that are extremely hard to answer in a scientific, dispassionate

When does insanity excuse criminal liability? A defendant has an excuse for liability, says Paul Robinson, in his book Criminal Law Defenses, when he or she is acting involuntarily and their own disability causes him or her to mistakenly or unknowingly violate a criminal prohibition. This person does not know whether his or her behavior is wrong or criminal (Robinson 222). This is in contrast to what is called a character-based

This new reformulation of the insanity defense, a kind of a fusion of the earlier M'Naghten and Durham tests, was intended to be a less constrictive version of the right-wrong and irresistible impulse tests. Today, "most states in the union allow this 'right-wrong' test and some states also allow defendants to argue that that they understood their behavior was criminal but were unable to control it. This is sometimes

Pre-Sentence Investigation Defense Attorney Jim Aiken Narcotics Detective Homicide Detective Miranda The Miranda rights were formulated in 1966 by the U.S. Supreme court after a case between Miranda v. Arizona. The Miranda rights relate to the frights of an individual when that person is being taken into custody by the police and before that individual is being questioned. The individual should be read out and told about his rights according to the Fifth Amendment so that