Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Empirical Research on the Insanity Defense and Attempted Reforms: Evidence Toward Informed Policy

Empirical Research on the Insanity Defense and Attempted Reforms: Evidence Toward Informed Policy The paper addresses some common questions about the insanity defense and issues raised by commonly proposed “reforms.” The first section begins with a brief description of the insanity defense and the reasons for its existence in the law. It then examines some of the popular myths and public misperceptions surrounding the insanity defense. The next three sections discuss proposed “reforms” and the empirical research that addresses their effect. These reforms, including various procedural changes in definitions, burden of proof, and expert testimony, the institution of a guilty but mentally ill verdict, and the abolition of the insanity defense itself, are reviewed, along with relevant research findings and policy issues. Finally, the development of sound conditional release programs for criminal defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity is proposed as a reform option which could serve the objectives of enhancing public safety and access to appropriate treatment while continuing to meet the objectives of the insanity defense within criminal jurisprudence. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Law and Human Behavior Springer Journals

Empirical Research on the Insanity Defense and Attempted Reforms: Evidence Toward Informed Policy

Law and Human Behavior , Volume 23 (3) – Sep 30, 2004

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/empirical-research-on-the-insanity-defense-and-attempted-reforms-uB0ir50GJV

References (46)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by Plenum Publishing Corporation
Subject
Psychology; Law and Psychology; Criminology and Criminal Justice, general; Personality and Social Psychology; Community and Environmental Psychology
ISSN
0147-7307
eISSN
1573-661X
DOI
10.1023/A:1022364700424
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The paper addresses some common questions about the insanity defense and issues raised by commonly proposed “reforms.” The first section begins with a brief description of the insanity defense and the reasons for its existence in the law. It then examines some of the popular myths and public misperceptions surrounding the insanity defense. The next three sections discuss proposed “reforms” and the empirical research that addresses their effect. These reforms, including various procedural changes in definitions, burden of proof, and expert testimony, the institution of a guilty but mentally ill verdict, and the abolition of the insanity defense itself, are reviewed, along with relevant research findings and policy issues. Finally, the development of sound conditional release programs for criminal defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity is proposed as a reform option which could serve the objectives of enhancing public safety and access to appropriate treatment while continuing to meet the objectives of the insanity defense within criminal jurisprudence.

Journal

Law and Human BehaviorSpringer Journals

Published: Sep 30, 2004

There are no references for this article.