Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Historical origins
MNaghtens Rules
Unsoundness of mind
Has been broadened in UK Any underlying pathological infirmity Cf. temporary (purpose of commitment under s. 84 vs criminal punishment) or externally caused (individual fault) infirmity Linked to notion of cognitive incapacity mental malfunctioning that renders A completely incapable of knowing acts nature or that act wrong/contrary to law At the point of crime cf. continuing nature
4
D was charged with trafficking and possessing of cannabis. A clinical expert testified that D was of subnormal intellectual capacity.
The Court of Appeal held: subnormal intellect is not unsoundness of mind True, the [expert opined] that D might not have been able to discern right from wrong but this opinion is itself inconclusive On the contrary, D knew it was contrary to law to sell drugs
Incapable of knowing
What about capable of knowing but did not exercise capacity at the time of crime? Indian courts
Require total incapacity Actual lack of knowledge No distinction between capacity and exercise of capacity (YMC prefers this why?)
6
MNaghten Rules
Local courts
Nature of Act
Unsoundness of mind --- results in incapable of knowing nature of act Penal Code illustrations
Refers to surface features of act Would this be merely partial inability to know nature of act? Includes harmful consequence
7
Disjunctive (favorable to A)
Wording Artificial distinction between different kinds of wrongs Morally wrong vs. legally wrong What is the purpose of criminal punishment?
Controversy
Should s. 84 be interpreted to include irresistible impulse? YMC: interpret act in s. 84 if irresistible impulse then not an act
Take note
10
Diminished Responsibility
Exception 7
11
Partial defense
Cf. insanity
Does not get you completely off the hook From s. 300 to s. 299 Why only for murder? You are ill but still aware physical/moral Sufficiently culpable for criminal punishment (Retribution) Other objectives of criminal punishment (Can be deterred?)
12
Diminished responsibility
Suffering from such abnormality of mind (whether arising from a condition of arrested or retarded development of mind or any inherent causes or induced by disease or injury) as substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts and omissions.
13
Diminished responsibility
YMC
advocates adopting three-stage test (abnormality + cause + substantial impairment) vs. composite test (Krishnasamy) Advocates adopting Bryne definition for abnormality of mind (that includes inability to exercise will-power) cf with actual wording of Penal Code)
14
Krishnasamy
The gravamen of Exception 7 concerns the straightforward question whether the offender was suffering from such abnormality of mind as substantially impaired his mental responsibility Splitting the one question into three stages compels the court to ask three questions instead of one. That may be an acceptable method provided that the court eventually reconstitutes the three stages to the composite question and answers it as a whole. Choo Han Teck J in the Court of Appeal
15
Abnormality of mind
Byrne definition (why does YMC advocate adopting this cf with actual wording of Penal Code)
Commonsense broad definition reasonable man will term abnormal perception of physical acts and matters ability to form a rational judgment on right or wrong exercise will power Volitional Degree Normal quirks?
16
Note:
Abnormality of mind
17
Cause of abnormality
Exception 7
Arrested or retarded development of the mind An inherent cause Induced by disease or injury
18
Causes of abnormality
19
Causes of abnormality
Inherent cause
Natural to persons mind At birth or after Permanent (other causes can be transitory)
20
Causes of abnormality
Disease or injury
Physical deterioration Can be caused by external factors (E.g. drugs, alcohol) as long as leads to actual physical deterioration
But note that cannot just be transitory effect of external factors (E.g. drugs, alcohol)
YMC: should look at whether without the drugs, alcohol --- still affected by underlying condition?
YMC
Australian example Impairment that justifies lowering of conviction
22
Jimmy Chua
Caution expressed by the Court of Appeal over the use of the term partial insanity or borderline insanity to describe Diminished Responsibility The need to distinguish between did not resist an impulse and could not resist an impulse.
23
Problems
Over-reliance on medical experts by courts Failure to interrogate link between mental problem and consequence (as defined in Penal Code provisions) Failure to differentiate between mental condition at time of crime and at time of trial
24