Criminal Defenses

1. Criminal Defenses

2. Defenses in general • Two different kinds of defenses: • Responsibility: People who argue they are not responsible for their actions because of some issue with their minds. • Justification/excuse: People who have no issues mentally, but who have a reason why they did what they did.

3. The Insanity Defense • If D can show he was insane at the time he committed a criminal act, he may be entitled to the verdict “not guilty by reason of insanity.” • If D succeeds with the insanity defense, he does not walk out of the courtroom free. • In virtually every state, any D who succeeds with the insanity defense will be involuntarily committed to a mental institution.

4. The Insanity Defense • In Illinois, three results can come from an insanity plea: • Not guilty by reason of insanity: Jury buys it, D is sent to a mental facility (probably for the rest of his/her life). • Guilty: Jury doesn’t buy it, D goes to jail. • Guilty but mentally ill: Jury kind of buys it, D goes to jail but receives treatment while incarcerated.

5. The Insanity Defense • The insanity defense can be heartbreaking, difficult to prove or disprove. • EXAMPLE: Naperville mother Marilyn Lemak murdered her three children, pled insanity.

6. The Insanity Defense • EXAMPLE: Lashuan Harris (right) threw her 3 kids (6, 2, 16 mos.) into SF bay in 2005. • Paranoid schizophrenic; laughing, talking to herself, rocking, smiling to self, etc. • Thought God told her to do it; felt they were in heaven.

7. The Insanity Defense • Jeffrey Dahmer killed and ate parts of victims, kept bodies, parts as trophies. Gacy (below) murdered 33 young boys and buried most of them under his house. • Was Dahmer insane? Was Gacy? • What kind of person commits such a crime? What kind of person commits any crime? Are we all insane? Sane? Where’s the line?? • What is the legal test to prove insanity with regard to crime?

8. The Insanity Defense • Before we get into the tests, one thing you should know: • NOTE: In many states, the insanity defense is coupled with a rule that no evidence relating to mental disease or defect may be introduced except as part of an insanity defense.

9. The Insanity Defense • EXAMPLE: D is charged with knifing his wife to death. As part of his defense, he tried to show that his depression and panic attacks prevented him from forming the intent to kill her. Given what was said in the note above, may he do this? Why or why not? • Point: Not in most states. All or nothing. Either he is insane or he isn’t. . .but some will allow for introduction of evidence of mental problems.

10. The Insanity Defense: Tests • Tests for insanity: There are two principal tests for whether D was insane – each used in different jurisdictions: • The M’Naghten Test • Irresistible impulse test

11. The M’Naghten Rule • Arose from the attempted assassination of British Prime Minister Robert Peel (right) in 1843 by Daniel M’Naghten (who was mentally ill, delusional). • Killed Peel’s secretary, Edward Drummond, with a pistol shot. • Judges found him not guilty by reason of insanity, Queen Victoria concerned; called judges before House of Lords to defend their verdict. Their explanation became “The M’Naghten Rule.”

12. The M’Naghten Rule • To establish insanity, the judges felt that a D must prove: • that he suffered a mental disease causing a defect in his reasoning powers, and, • that as a result, either (a) he did not understand the “nature and quality” of his act or, (b) he did not know that his act was wrong. • Set the standard for British and American law. Still in use in some form in 25 of the states today.

13. The M’Naghten Rule • D (who has a mental disorder) strangles his wife believing that he is squeezing a lemon. Insanity? • Point: Probably insane. Didn’t understand the “nature and quality” of his actions. • NOTE: Very rare to get someone like this. . .have to truly not know what he/she is doing.

14. The M’Naghten Rule • D is attracted to bright objects, and therefore shoplifts jewelry constantly, though intellectually he knows that this is morally wrong and also illegal. Is D insane under the M’Naghten test (if he has a mental disorder)? • Point: No. (1) Knows this is wrong; (2) Understands the nature and quality of his actions.

15. The M’Naghten Rule • D kills his wife because he believes he hears the voice of God telling him to do so. He has a history of mental problems. Can he claim insanity? • Point: Yes. Deific commands are good under this.

16. The M’Naghten Rule • EXAMPLE: Lashuan Harris (right) threw her 3 kids (6, 2, 16 mos.) into SF bay in 2005. • Paranoid schizophrenic; laughing, talking to herself, rocking, smiling to self, etc. • Thought God told her to do it; felt they were in heaven. • Found insane in 2007.

17. The M’Naghten Rule • (State v. Crenshaw, 1985, 976 in Crim Law) D with long history of mental illness kills his wife because he thinks she has been unfaithful to him. When arrested, he admits he killed her, but he claims it was his duty to do so under his Moscovite religious faith. He did this, even though he knows that society thinks killing is wrong and that it’s illegal. Is this insanity under M’Naghten?

18. The M’Naghten Rule • Point: No. He knows his acts were morally wrong from society’s viewpoint and also knew his acts were illegal. Guilty • His personal belief that it was his duty to kill his wife for her alleged infidelity can’t get him off the hook here. Deific command people have their free will subsumed to the belief in the deific decree. This was not available to Crenshaw. He argued that he followed the faith and that the faith believes it is their duty to kill an unfaithful wife. • This is not the same as deific command. His beliefs are not the equivalent to a deific decree and do not relieve him from responsibility for his acts.

19. The Insanity Defense • Go back to Marilyn Lemak, who again murdered her three children, pleaded insanity. • Lemack failed, received life in prison.

20. The M’Naghten Rule • Dahmer and Gacy were not found legally insane. Was very methodical. . .seemed to know what he was doing was wrong. • Point: This test is a difficult one to meet. Few plead insanity, and even fewer are successful. • “Successful”? Life in mental facility/prison. • This truly is for the sickest of the sick; some think the standard is too high.

21. The M’Naghten Rule • Currently, 17 states use the M’Naghten rule while 4 others use a modified version of M’Naghten. • Four states use M’Naghten in combination with the “irresistible impulse” test (which we’ll learn later).

22. The M’Naghten Rule • Watch the films about John Hinkley and Andrea Yates and ask yourself. . .were these people insane or not?

23. The M’Naghten Rule • Lorena Bobbitt cut off her husband’s. . .ouch. Charged with “malicious wounding” (mayhem). • Found NG/Insanity using a second test, the “irresistible impulse” test.

24. The Irresistible Impulse Test • In the late nineteenth century some states and federal courts in the United States, dissatisfied with the M'Naghten rule, adopted the irrestible impulse test. • Felt M’Naghten was focused on thought, but didn’t focus on emotion. • This test, which had first been used in Ohio in 1834, emphasized the inability to control one's actions.

25. The Irresistible Impulse Test • A person who committed a crime during an uncontrollable "fit of passion" was considered insane and not guilty under this test. • Person here may understand right from wrong, but could not control his actions.

26. The Irresistible Impulse Test • Look at the example of the shoplifter above (loves bright/shiny objects, can’t control himself even though he knows it’s wrong). Would this pass the “irresistible impulse test”? • Point: Yep. Textbook example.

27. The Irresistible Impulse Test • Today, this test is discredited. • Only in use in four states, and only in combination with M’Naghten. • Why? John Hinckley. He used this to defend himself, found NG by reason of insanity. People were outraged, states tightened up. • Interesting follow ups on Hinckley, BTW (1, 2).

28. Other insanity tests. . . • Substantial capacity: Test created in 1962 as part of the “Model Penal Code.” (referred to as the MPC test also) • “A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct (1) as a result of mental disease of defect (2) he lacks substantial capacity either to (a) appreciate the criminality [wrongfulness] of his conduct or (b) to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.” • What is this? M’Naghten + irresistible impulse. • Currently 15 states use the MPC standard.

29. Insanity Defense: IL • Today, Illinois law states a person is not criminally responsible for conduct if "as a result of a mental disease or mental defect, he lacks substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct.“ • “Substantial capacity” from above definition, but see what’s left out? • ANS: “conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.” (irresistible impulse factor). • Very “M’Naghten” like. . .just uses the phrase “substantial capacity.” This is a modified version of the MPC test. Six other states follow something similar.

30. Insanity Defense: IL • In 1981, Illinois adopted the verdict of "guilty but mentally ill," an option that continues to stir vigorous debate. Defendants who are guilty but mentally ill are sent to prison for the same term as they would be if convicted without the qualifier of their mental illness. They are supposed to get additional psychiatric care. They rarely do. • Apart from being somewhat disingenuous, the verdict of guilty but mentally ill often confuses jurors, critics said.

31. Insanity Defense: IL • "It's sort of an illegitimate compromise," said Paul H. Robinson, a Northwestern University criminal-law professor and former federal prosecutor. "Jurors can feel like they're doing their job even though they're not doing their job." • About the same time, Illinois narrowed its legal definition of insanity. The state tossed out part of the definition that deemed insane someone who was unable to control his actions, the so-called irresistible-impulse test. (1981. . .when was Reagan shot)

32. Insanity Defense: IL • Remember story of Jeanette Sliwinski? Pleaded insanity. Was admitted to mental hospital two weeks before crash, released after one day. Attny claimed psychiatrists failed her. • “Guilty but mentally ill” of reckless homicide. 8 years, served 4. Released. Oct. 2008.

33. Insanity Defense: Fed. Law • Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act (1984) (after Hinckley). • "It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution under any Federal statute that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendant, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality of the wrongfulness of his acts. Mental disease or defect does not otherwise constitute a defense."

34. Insanity Defense: Fed. Law • This act, a response to the Hinckley verdict, eliminated the Irresistible Impulse Test from the insanity defense under federal law. • The act also provided that "the defendant has the burden of proving the defense of insanity by clear and convincing evidence.“ • Previously under federal law, the government had the burden of proving sanity.

35. Insanity: Burden of Proof • If a D throws the insanity plea on the table, who is the prove what? • Does the P have to prove the D is sane? Or does the D have to prove that he’s insane? • ANSWER: D has to prove he’s insane; must do so with a preponderance of the evidence. (Not beyond a reasonable doubt). • Why? Hinkley. . .used to be P’s job to prove sanity. No more. • Law in IL changed in 1981. . .soon after Hinkley verdict.

36. Insanity Defense • Four states have no insanity defense at all (Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Utah). • Right to the insanity defense? No. USSC case in 1994 allowed states to deny this.

37. Insanity: Other “syndromes” • In the US, many different “syndromes” have been presented in criminal trials. • Some juries have bought, others not so much. • Here are just a few of these: interesting.

38. Insanity: Other syndromes • Black Rage Syndrome: Created by NY attorney William Kunstler after reading Black Rage by Grier & Cobbs. Anger over racial injustice serves as catalyst or trigger for pre-existing mental problem. Used unsuccessfully in the Colin Ferguson (right) case who killed six passengers on a Long Island train. • Chronic Lateness Syndrome: Used in 1992 to explain a fired Chicago school teacher's tendency to arrive late. Admitted as attempt at justification.

39. Insanity: Other “syndromes” • Distant Father Syndrome: Invented by Robert Bly in book Iron John (1993), explains crime as vindictiveness toward an absent father who never paid child support and never showed son his workplace. • Drug Abuse Defense: (People v. Richard 1989, CA) often the claim of child molesters that they are not responsible because they were high on drugs at the time, generally unsuccessful.

40. Insanity: Other “syndromes” • Fan Obsession Syndrome: First invoked by psychiatrist Park Elliot Dietz in 1992 to defend Robert Bardo who killed actress Rebecca Schaeffer. Jury didn't buy it. • Fetal Alcohol Syndrome: If mother consumed alcohol during pregnancy, produces "sadistic side" of personality later in life, similar to Fetal Trimethadione (Epilepsy medicine) syndrome. Admissible in U.S. and taken quite seriously in Canada. • Intermittent explosive disorder (?!): 1,2.

41. Insanity: Other “syndromes” • Gone with the Wind Syndrome: Named after the movie & used by rape experts to explain why rapists believe sex has to be spontaneous and done after some resistance on the part of the woman. • Meek-Mate Syndrome: First invoked by a CA man in 1994 who killed his wife because she psychologically emasculated him by calling him names, ridiculing him in public, and forcing him to sleep on the floor.

42. Insanity: Other “syndromes” • Premenstrual Stress Syndrome: Hormonal changes are so severe that a woman is driven to the unthinkable. Used successfully to acquit Virginia surgeon Geraldine Richter in 1991 for DUI & Zsa Zsa-type behavior. • Rock and Roll Defense: Alleges that subliminal messages in rock , or in some cases rap, music, were the cause of conduct. Used in Manson defense (Beatles), Judas Priest (1990), and Tupac Shukir music. • “Impoverished French Muslim syndrome” (?!)

43. Insanity: Other “syndromes” • Daniel Petric (17), plays Halo 3 18 hours a day (incapacitated by injury). Parents limit his playing time; he plans, shoots both parents in he head (“Close your eyes…I have a surprise for you”), tries to make it look like a murder/suicide, takes the game. Kills mom, dad survives. • Lawyers argue insanity; addiction to video games blinded him to the reality/finality of death. • Didn’t work. Guilty, 17 to life 6/09. Judge though felt this was akin to drug addiction, understood.

44. Insanity: “Twinkie Defense” • Probably the most infamous “syndrome.” • Murder of George Mosconi, Harvey Milk by Dan White in 1978. • Argued that he suffered from “diminished capacity” brought on by depression. “Insanityish” defense allowed in CA at the time: Not able to form intent needed for some crimes. • Convicted of vol manslaughter, not 1st degree murder. Outrage in SF.

45. Insanity Defense: New Ones • Story of a defendant who claimed “caffeine induced psychosis.” (2009). Here’s another one (2010) • Father (Christopher Vaughn), accused of killing wife, kids pleads “amnesia defense.” (2010)

46. Intoxication • What happens when a D is intoxicated at the time he/she commits a crime? • EXAMPLE: Story of Martin Heidgen, (7/05, trial: 2006).

47. Example: Homicide • Take Martin Heidgen. . .what do you charge him with? His mind is clouded by alcohol. . . • 1st Degree: Intentional, premeditated • 2nd Degree: Intentional, spontaneous; (2) intent to inflict grievous bodily injury; (3) reckless disregard for human life (knew of a risk, kept going). • Invol. Manslaughter: Criminally negligent (did not meet duty of care)

48. Intoxication • From the outline: Voluntary self-induced intoxication does not “excuse” criminal conduct, in general. • Although voluntary intoxication is not an “excuse,” it may prevent D from having the required mental state. If so, D will not be guilty. Thus even self-induced intoxication may prevent D from having the requisite intent, if the crime is defined so as to require intent.

49. Intoxication • Suppose that in a particular jurisdiction, first-degree murder is defined so that D must be shown to have had the intent to kill. D gets drunk in a bar and on the spot decides to kill another patron in the bar. He sits down and plans what he is going to do, searches for a weapon, finds a bat behind the bar and attacks the patron, killing him. He is charged with first-degree murder. Can he use his drunkenness as a defense? • Point: Yes. Drunken state does not equal intent to kill. Should not be charged with this in the first place. . .could be 2nd or invol.

50. Intoxication • D, sober, decides to place a bomb under V’s car, in the hopes that V will be blown up. D prepares the bomb. D then gets drunk. In his drunken stupor, he places the bomb under X’s car; he is so drunk that he forgets why he is doing this, and at the moment the bomb is placed (and the moment a little while later when it goes off), D has no intent to harm anyone. • Point: Intent here existed first. . .moment he prepared bomb. Murder.