Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Insanity (The defence of insanity is a general defence which is available…

- - - - DPP v H
        
        D drunk driving and suffered psychosis
  - - - first ccase for judge to raise defence
- - - - under mental health act
    - - under Criminal Procedure
- - - - coedre
        
        physical rather than moral
        
        cutting someones throat under the delusion of cutting bread
        
        it is not that they do not realize cutting someones throat is wrong but they do not know they are cutting someones throat
    - - legally rather than morally wrong
        
        windle(1952)
        
        D killed suicidal wife with aspirin overdose. D knew act was wrong as he said '' i suppose they will hang me for this.
        
        confirmed in johnson (2007)
        
        D stabbed V suffering from paranoid shizophrenia
        
        D though he had the moral right to do it but knew it was legally wrong
    - - being deprived of the power to reason
        
        does not have to be permanent
        
        R v Sullivan
        
        suffered defect of reason due to epilleptic fit
        
        a temporary state
        
        Clarke (1972)
        
        old woman stole jar of coffee and mince meat and acted absent mindedly due to depression.
    - - internal and external factor
        
        insanity can only be caused by Internal factor
        
        Diabetes
        
        hyperglycemia=internal
        
        Henessey
        
        D drove a vehicle whilst disqualified and failed to take his insulin
        
        when insulin not taken
        
        hypoglycemia=external
        
        Quick
        
        nurse attacked patient, took insulin and failed to eat
        
        defence not given as it was the insulin not the diabetes.
      - legal definition not medical
        
        includes hardening of the arteries
        
        Kemp(1957)
        
        D struck his wife with hammer causing GBH
        
        Epillepsy
        
        Sullivan(1984)
        
        Sleepwalking
        
        Burgees(1991)
        
        internal factor
        
        D hit v with a video player and a bottle whilst sleepwalking
- - - - confirmation of 2 doctors required
  - - - one of the doctors must be approved by home secretary and must have expertise in field
    - - if jury agrees , a judge decides what happens to D
      - if jury don't agree D will be accuited
  - - - DR will be preffered
- - - - hyperglycemia allows defense but hypoglycemia doesn't
      - shows absurdity
    - - a person of an unsound mind can only be detained where proper account of medical expertise can be taken
    - - If D is medically insane, theres little point in providing him with medical treatment
  - - - D was prosecuted under terrorism act for collecting useful info for terrorists. he was psychotic and thought prison staff were talking about him so did this to wind them up.
        
        doctors said he was insane but didnt get the defence as not insane by legal definition
  - - - is a person with epillepsy dangerous to society ? is hyper more dangerous then hypo ?
- - - - would avoid stigma of being insane