Confusing Insanity Defense?

Question

2 situations both defendants pleaded an insanity defense two real cases.

1- woman kills her newborn baby and claims god told her to do it, woman claims insanity defense jury find her guilty of insanity she ends up being dropped of the 1st degree murder charge and spending most of her life in a mental institution. to believe god told her is based on freewill and you can't go against that in court.
2- Man kills his wife because according to his religion if your wife betrays, cheats on you, you can kill her. he stabs her 24 times than takes an axe and cuts her head off. he used the axe soo visiously against her neck and so hard that you can see scratch marks on the floor. he pleads insanity because he claimed according to his religion he was allowed to kill. jury found him not guilty of insanity defense and ends up in jail for the rest of his life.

y insanity defense wasn't admissible in 2nd case? he did kill her because religion said so like the woman and god case

Answer 1

One time I was convicted of public nudity for taking a poop in a toilet that was in the showroom of a hardware store. I plead the insanity defense and got off with a warning.

Answer 2

Insanity in a courtroom is not about belief but about your ability to know right from wrong, about your ability to understand your actions and their consequences.
The fact that one was male killing a wife and the other was a woman doing her own kid might be a factor in the decision as well.
Nobody wants to believe a mother would do such a thing.
It is plain crazy.
Men have been demonized enough in the news that killing a wife seems almost normal.
Don't forget that while the law is written and impartial, the decisions are made by humans and logic sometimes matters less than emotions.

Answer 3

Case 1. The woman didn't claim that "her religion" told her that killing her newborn was ok. She said "god" told her to do it. That would indicate hearing voices from an incorporeal source AT THE LEAST. Hearing voices that "aren't there" is one of the symptoms of schizophrenia, a type of mental illness. The NGRI defense holds, assuming she was assessed by a psychologist.

Case 2. The man claims that "his religion" told him he "could" kill his wife for adultery. No audible voices here, no sign of schizophrenia. He is following the written rules of his religion, which he can accept or reject by his own free will. Having a religion is NOT a mental illness; accepting it's moral code is a normal thing. He could have chosen to have mercy on his wife, yet made the mental decision to kill, and NOT in the manner prescribed by his religion (it is usually stoning or hanging). The ability to read, accept, and weigh options shows the man is sane. He chose to commit a crime, and is trying to hide behind his religion. NO NGRI in this case.

Answer 4

Insanity isn't based on religion saying it's ok in court. It's based on whether the person knew the difference between right and wrong when the crime was committed and whether they could understand the consequences of their actions.

Answer 5

ignore different feedback it truly is on the aspect of temp insanity ...... there is not any such element If i come across my spouse in mattress with yet another guy, i'd soot them both if a shotgun became accessible and if no longer then i'd come across a hammer or baseball bat and do the pair of them in no longer in warm blood or temp insanity yet coldly and with malice ...... each and every blow will be a calculated blow with the guidelines of causing as a lot discomfort as attainable previously the "Coup de Grass" by the way, If the regulation nevertheless stands in France ........ a guy can kill his spouse on the grounds of infidelity

Answer 6

Because when you hear "god" you're crazy sense he doesn't exist. It's like hearing the easter bunny.