You can read about the history of the insanity defense at http://crime.about.com/od/issues/a/insanity.htm. Our modern understanding of the concept is rooted in a case from 1843, but the Greeks and Romans understood it too. As my column noted, it is not attempted very often and it is unsuccessful most of the time.

The way the insanity defense has been handled in U.S. courts has not been static; it has gone through an evolution. The pendulum swung more in the direction of legally insane defendants form decades but partly because of the case of John Hinckley, the man who tried to kill President Ronald Reagan, the pendulum has swung back. At http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/hinckley/hinckleyinsanity.htm you can read about that perspective.

Some forensic patients at the Colorado State Hospital have been there for 40 years. It is no country club. The idea is to treat insane people so they can function again in society. Some citizens have a hard time accepting that someone might commit a heinous crime, yet be deemed able to resume life in free society once again after years of therapy. Those citizens should think about it a bit more before giving in to the very human desire for revenge.

Revenge is very understandable. It is one of the reasons we put people in prison and in many cases, there is nothing at all wrong with society acting on its collective revenge.  But the insanity defense is an appropriate tool in a small number of cases. We have experts to sort it out. They are not infallible, but they're pretty good at their jobs.

The insanity defense is one of the things that separates us from the rabble.  

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.