![]() He then goes on to distinguish between delusion and insanity, stating that delusion is not a cause of insanity. There is an apparent impossibility in measuring the full extent insanity, acknowledging that some cases could be incomprehensible or immeasurable. One having reference to partial insanity and the other, the delusions of the insane. Davey outlines two important matters for the psychologist in the proceedings. Is one responsible if he was medically deemed insane? Does this limit the overall responsibility? The document shows a greater willingness to uncover the problems in the current state of the justice system from an offender’s perspective. He frequently brings up the question of insanity and responsibility. The dialogue acts as a call to the Provincial Association to pledge for reforms in the ‘plea for insanity’ in accordance with medical recommendations. Davey suggests that without this, is it possible to have justice? This implies a shift in the medical profession in the nature of their role in the judicial process, based around one of the ‘promotion of scientific truth’. Davey acknowledges the split with regards to legal and medical professionals with regards to diminished responsibility, arguing that legal professionals were ‘unacquainted with the works of God’. The piece opens with an alluding to the changing opinion of medical professionals and their subsequent desire for legal professionals to adopt said views on insanity. Anniversary Meeting of the Provincial Medical and Surgical Association, Manchester 1854. This idea seems to be at odds with the previous concept in the rule which stated the importance of the condition of the mind at which the crime is committed. The delusions the person in question is experiencing, no matter if they have no control over them, play a large role in deciding their sentence. ![]() If his delusion, on the other hand, was that another man had, ‘inflicted a serious injury to his character’, and he killed him, ‘in revenge’, he would be liable for punishment. The rules go on to state that a man, ‘under the influence of delusion’, who supposes another is, ‘attempting to take away his life’, and kills this man in self-defense would be exempt of punishment. Interestingly, intent is also a primary factor in deciding a verdict. The idea of cognition, once again, is integral. To further bolster this view, the rules go on to state the party accused is, ‘punishable according to the nature of the crime committed if he knew at the time of committing such crime that he was acting contrary to the law’. Clearly, the condition of the mind and ability to think coherently is key here. The result was the McNaghten Rules in Britain which stated, “to establish the defense on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing or, if he did know, that he did not know he was doing was wrong’. Particular questions considered were: what is the proper standard for insanity and what should the proper role of the medical professional be? With the latter, the idea of how much knowledge a medical professional could offer concerning an individual they had never previously met was seen as important. The verdict led to a public outcry about the insanity defence, leading to a number of questions being posed by the House of Lords to the British judiciary. At the trial, witnesses testified about McNaghten’s mental state and, consequently, he was found not guilty on the grounds of insanity. Several weeks later, Drummond died from his injuries. Meaning to shoot the Prime Minister at the time, Robert Peel, McNaghten failed to identify him and accidentally shot Drummond, Peel’s personal secretary, instead. Daniel McNaghten, a woodturner from Scotland, assassinated English civil servant Edward Drummond whilst suffering from, ‘morbid delusions’, in January of 1843.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |