why isn't someone found guilty (not innocent) by reason of insanity?

Question

it would seem that you're either guilty or innocent of the crime and insanity or sanity can then dictate the punishment

i appreciate the detail of "boredlawyer"'s response and understand the intent concept but shouldn't intent arise during the sentencing of the crime. even if one doesn't intend they are still guilty, right?

for me, one with intent obviously would get a harsher punishment than those without but you're either guilty or you're not

Answer 1

To prove guilt in a criminal case, a prosecutor must show both (1) a wrongful act AND (2) a wrongful state of mind. Basically, a person must intend to do wrong AND actually do wrong to commit a crime. (Although just attempting the wrongful act or just beginning it will count in many cases, too.) A person who is legally insane or was at the time they did something wrong is generally considered to have been unable to know right from wrong, or to know that what they were doing was wrong, or something like that. (The exact rules vary a little from one State to another.) If the person didn't really understand their own actions, then logically they could not have intended them. Therefore, a prosecutor will be unable to prove the second required piece, the wrongful intention, even if the wrongful act is terribly clear to everyone. Without proving both parts, there can be no guilt in the vast majority of crimes. (Some, like statutory rape, don't require a bad state of mind, but that's an answer to another question.)

To try to remove the element of intention from serious crimes, you would need to support murder charges and convictions for: (1) a small child who gets hold of a handgun, which goes off and kills someone; (2) a sober driver in a fatal accident that was not his fault; and (3) a person who, out of the clear blue, has a heart attack while driving, loses consciousness and runs someone over. No thoughtful person could genuinely support such injustice. The idea that justice means only punishing people for the wrong they do intentionally goes back at least as far as Aristotle, and it should not perish in our generation.

Answer 2

In some places you can be, in others you can't! Some are found Not Guilty by reason of insanity, however they spend more time in a State Hospital than the would if they were sentenced!

Answer 3

It is assumed that since the person is insane then they could not know that they were committing the crime. Therefore they did not commit the crime the insanity did. I personally believe that insanity should not be an issue in court, but it is so we have to live with it.

Answer 4

Because someone who is declared insane is not capable of differentiating between right and wrong and therefor can not be held responsible for their acts.

Those people are still generally sent to a locked facility for treatment.

Answer 5

That's a good point. I thought the same thing when Andrea Yates' (second) sentence was handed down.

Answer 6

Cooooo Cooooo Cooooo Cooooo

Answer 7

If your referring to Andrea Yates, I think she should be put to sleep or thrown in jail.

Answer 8

because if you are insane that means that you are guilty of mentally unstable and you cannot be trusted and are unsafe to yourself and others.

Answer 9

I agree with you. How can we change the law?

Answer 10

very astute! i agree