Pleading insanity? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

anleja · 01-11-2004, 08:22 PM

There is a story on the news where I live about a kid who killed his mom and sister. He admitted to doing it, but is planning on pleading insanity.

Now... is it just me, but isn't ANYONE who murders someone insane? "Insane" as in "Not functioning mentally properly"? Can anyone murder somebody while being sane?

Sure, someone who does something like kill someone during a robbery would probably not use the insanity defense, but I think they are about as insane as anyone can be to kill someone, period.

It seems to me that anyone who murders, whether is be because of disillusionment or simply being cruel, have crossed the line to being insane. Why should some be given a chance to rehabilitate themselves, while some get executed or life in jail? I think if the seed of being able to murder someone is in someone, they should be put away for a long time, if not for punishment than at least to keep everyone else safe.

Do you think people's punishments should hinge on if they are considered insane, or do you think they should all be judged based on the crime? Should they rehabilitate ALL murderers, with a chance for release? If not, where should you draw the line between someone who should stay locked up (or executed) and who can be deemed safe enough to release into the world?

SecretMethod70 · 01-11-2004, 08:26 PM

insanity in the legal sense means they were incapable of distinguishing right from wrong.

Most murderers - while being obviously disturbed - realize what they are doing is "wrong."

On a side note, rehabilitation is what prison is INTENDED for. Somewhere the system went awry though and now we just look at it to punish - meaning anyone who does get out is more likely than not to commit a crime again.

I believe more often than not a person can be rehabilitated. As far as murderers are concerned - the majority of people who commit a crime of passion can probably be rehabilitated. The others probably much less so, but it'd be a terrible thing not to try except for in the most extreme of circumstances.

denim · 01-11-2004, 08:34 PM

As far as I'm concerned, doing the "insanity" thing in murder cases, meaning "not situations of self-defense", is a ADMISSION of guilt, and it should be treated that way.

Spartak · 01-11-2004, 08:34 PM

The ol insanity plea has a horrible track record, you're better off taking a plea.

Only something like 5% of insanity defences actually succeed, not sure of the exact statistic though, but its very low.

anleja · 01-11-2004, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spartak

Only something like 5% of insanity defences actually succeed, not sure of the exact statistic though, but its very low.

According to the news story I was watching, only 1% of murder defendents used the insanity defense, I don't remember how many of those actually succeed, although 5% sounds right.

I was surprised to hear it was such a small number. I seem to recall a few local cases where the insanity defense was used. Maybe people in Michigan are a bit nuttier than most.

I recall reading about a woman a few cities to the west of where I live who drowned her kids in a bathtub, four or five of them. She did it supposedly because voices were telling her the world was going to end (an interesting thing was that this happened on Sept 10th, 2001). Certainly insane by anyone's definition, but should she ever be allowed to roam the streets, unsupervised?

spived2 · 01-11-2004, 09:10 PM

Exactly, if they plead insanity, they should be locked up for being insane.

01-11-2004, 08:22 PM	#1 (permalink)
anleja disconnected Location: ignoreland	Pleading insanity? There is a story on the news where I live about a kid who killed his mom and sister. He admitted to doing it, but is planning on pleading insanity. Now... is it just me, but isn't ANYONE who murders someone insane? "Insane" as in "Not functioning mentally properly"? Can anyone murder somebody while being sane? Sure, someone who does something like kill someone during a robbery would probably not use the insanity defense, but I think they are about as insane as anyone can be to kill someone, period. It seems to me that anyone who murders, whether is be because of disillusionment or simply being cruel, have crossed the line to being insane. Why should some be given a chance to rehabilitate themselves, while some get executed or life in jail? I think if the seed of being able to murder someone is in someone, they should be put away for a long time, if not for punishment than at least to keep everyone else safe. Do you think people's punishments should hinge on if they are considered insane, or do you think they should all be judged based on the crime? Should they rehabilitate ALL murderers, with a chance for release? If not, where should you draw the line between someone who should stay locked up (or executed) and who can be deemed safe enough to release into the world? Last edited by anleja; 01-11-2004 at 08:25 PM..

01-11-2004, 08:26 PM	#2 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	insanity in the legal sense means they were incapable of distinguishing right from wrong. Most murderers - while being obviously disturbed - realize what they are doing is "wrong." On a side note, rehabilitation is what prison is INTENDED for. Somewhere the system went awry though and now we just look at it to punish - meaning anyone who does get out is more likely than not to commit a crime again. I believe more often than not a person can be rehabilitated. As far as murderers are concerned - the majority of people who commit a crime of passion can probably be rehabilitated. The others probably much less so, but it'd be a terrible thing not to try except for in the most extreme of circumstances. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling Last edited by SecretMethod70; 01-11-2004 at 08:32 PM..

01-11-2004, 08:34 PM	#4 (permalink)
Spartak Bang bang Location: New Zealand	The ol insanity plea has a horrible track record, you're better off taking a plea. Only something like 5% of insanity defences actually succeed, not sure of the exact statistic though, but its very low. __________________ I can read your mind... looking at you... I can read your mind...

01-11-2004, 09:10 PM	#6 (permalink)
spived2 Desert Rat Location: Arizona	Exactly, if they plead insanity, they should be locked up for being insane. __________________ "This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-à-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V." - V

01-11-2004, 08:34 PM	#3 (permalink)
denim Banned Location: Massachusetts, USA	As far as I'm concerned, doing the "insanity" thing in murder cases, meaning "not situations of self-defense", is a ADMISSION of guilt, and it should be treated that way.