[ad_1]
Defendants must have the right “state of mind” to be convicted of most crimes. Mental disorders can deny this state of mind, with two categories of defense: insanity and intoxication. The defendant must prove a defect prevented them from forming the necessary state of mind. Tests for insanity include the “M’Naghten” rule and the “irresistible impulse” rule. Intoxication can be a defense if it prevents the defendant from forming intent, but only if it was involuntary.
To be convicted of most offences, it is necessary to ascertain that the plaintiff had the right mens rea – i.e. the “state of mind” – to commit the offence. The state of mind required depends both on the crime and on the jurisdiction, but certain mental defects can deny the existence of that particular state of mind. There are two broad categories of mental disorder advocacy that are typically asserted. The first is the insanity defense which depends on a particular defect of the defendant’s mind. The other category of mental disorder defense is intoxication, which can be divided into voluntary and involuntary intoxication.
To assert a mental disorder defense, the defendant must prove that there was a defect of some kind that prevented him from forming the state of mind necessary to commit the crime. For example, most jurisdictions require that anyone convicted of murder must have had “premeditated malice” in committing their actions that led to the victim’s death. Premeditation generally implies that the person specifically intended to cause at least serious bodily harm to the victim before committing the act that killed them. An adequate mental disorder defense would tend to demonstrate that the defendant did not have the mental capacity to want to kill or seriously injure the victim at the time of the offensive action. If this mental disorder defense is successful, it would not necessarily result in the defendant’s innocence, but could reduce the offense to a less serious charge such as manslaughter.
There are several types of tests for the insanity mental disorder defense that are recognized in various jurisdictions. However, there are two in particular that are more commonly recognized. The majority rule is the “M’Naghten” rule, which can be asserted if the defendant did not know that his act would be wrong or did not understand the nature and quality of his actions. The other is the “irresistible impulse” rule, which requires you to demonstrate that the defendant was unable to control his actions or conform his conduct to the law.
Intoxication can be brought up as a mental disorder defense if the intoxication would have put the defendant in a state where he could not form the required intent to commit the specific crime for which he is accused. The only line to draw is whether the intoxication was voluntary or involuntary. Unintentional intoxication occurs when a person ingests an intoxicating substance without knowing its nature, under threat of serious bodily harm or under medical advice. Conversely, willful intoxication occurs when a person intentionally takes an intoxicating substance with knowledge of its intoxicating nature and is very
[ad_2]