what must the defendant prove to be found not guilty by reason of insanity?

Answer 1

A defendant would have to prove that he was incapable of understanding the wrongful nature of his conduct.

Real life Examples include--D strangled someone, but he thought he was squeezing grapefruit. .

Or. D killed a nurse but because he was so insane, he thought he had killed a demon.


It is actually much different that just not knowing right from wrong. Because it requires that you do not understand the wrongful nature of the particular act, even if you knew right from wrong in all other aspects of existence.

Answer 2

It has to be proven that you didn't know right from wrong at the time of the crime. It is extremely hard to prove if you're going for "temporary insanity" during the crime. It is easier if you ARE mentally ill and you really can't tell right from wrong and that makes you a danger to others...it would mean serving time in a prison mental ward, which most are notorious for abuse of "patients". Some people even die...so make sure if this is you that you know what you're getting into by pleading insane at the time the crime...the jury is who will decide whether you are guilty, guilty but insane, guilty but temporarily insane, ... if you really are going for an insanity plea, the best thing to do is "be unfit for trial". That you are so messed up that you would have no concept of what is going on around you. If it goes to a jury trial, it would be so hard to prove to 12 ordinary citizens that you could be insane during the act you committed but be normal enough to sit in court and participate in your defense.

Answer 3

A person is legally insane (temporarily or otherwise) when they can't tell right from wrong. Guilt is determined when the evidence indicates that the person knowingly committed the crime. If they were insane and didn't realize that they were committing a crime, they can't be charged 'guilty'.

Note that they can, however, be committed, if their insanity may prove dangerous to others in the future.

Answer 4

You don't really have to prove anything, you just have to get a good lawyer that can come in and give a good enough presentation. Put up some powerpoint slides, give expert testimony, tell the defendant what to wear and how to behave. If the presentation is convincing and the jury likes the defendant and their lawyer, then they will win.

Answer 5

They must prove that they had no way of telling the difference between right and wrong, do a google on the "mcnaughton rule".
The "durham rule" establishes that the accused is not guilty if their actions were due to mental defect, such as retardation.
Here is a good site to read about it...

http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/insane/insanity.html

Answer 6

From very own adventure, that's not technically probable to be no longer responsible for reason of insanity. extra probably, while you're insane, you're responsible. in case you may instruct which you're insane and psychologists vouch for you, than they are going to deliver you to an asylum have been you will stay until eventually you get extra useful. in the journey that your crime became quite undesirable and all and sundry has any reason to have self belief you're able to commit the crime returned, you need to circulate directly to reformatory when you have out of the asylum. It occurred to an acquaintance of mine.

Answer 7

Check out the site below. It is about the Andrea Yates case and although it deals with post partum psychosis, the base of proof is still the same. Lots of good medical information there.

Answer 8

That they didn't know what they were doing at the time the crime was commited. A doctor must judge the person to be imcompetent. Then they will be place in a mental facility reevaluated every 6 months or so.

Answer 9

A very good Lawyer. That most likely will be wxpensive to get. Like most things it comes down to money.

Answer 10

Must fail a psychological exam only way.