On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Bob Sullivan <rf.sulli...@gmail.com> wrote: <snip> Her court appointed > attorney met with her for 3 hours over two days and says she is > insane. You think???
I see that there are (so far) 43 posts on this thread, and I'm not sure if I'll read every one of them, but before I leave this thread for happier pastures, I just thought I'd mention that the criminal definition of insanity is very narrow and technical. It's not necessarily the same as a medical diagnosis. Basically, for an insane plea to be successful, it must be proved that the defendant, due to a mental disease or defect ~was not able to appreciate the nature, quality or wrongfulness~ of her acts ~at the time the offense was committed~. Very hard to prove, so it doesn't work very often. As well, a person found not guilty due to insanity ~does not~ walk. They are held in a mental health facility until it is determined that they no longer pose a significant threat to public safety. In Canada, it is said that they are held "at the pleasure of the Lieutenant-General's" until cured (I love that term - so archaic!). In fact the criminally insane are often held for a longer period of time than would be the length of the jail sentence if they had been found guilty - one of the reasons that the defense is rarely used. Just ask McMurphy... cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
