NCJ Number
11925
Journal
Criminologist Volume: 8 Issue: 29 Dated: (SUMMER 1973) Pages: 20-28
Date Published
1973
Length
9 pages
Annotation
A NEW DEFINITION OF INSANITY THAT PRECLUDES A FINDING OF GUILT OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR AN ACT THAT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN COMMITTED, BUT FOR' A MENTAL ABNORMALITY.
Abstract
THE AUTHOR DEFENDS THE VAGUENESS OF THE 'BUT FOR' TEST AS A FLEXIBILITY THAT ALLOWS CURRENT LAYMAN'S STANDARDS TO DEFINE CASE BY CASE A TERM HE SUGGESTS MEDICAL STANDARDS CANNOT DEFINE. THERE IS ALREADY AN ANALAGOUS LACK OF DEFINITENESS IN STANDARDS FOR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND TORT LITIGATION. THE VALIDITY OF THE NEW TEST RESTS ON OUR CONFIDENCE IN THE JURY'S CAPACITY TO REFLECT CURRENT SOCIAL VALUES AND TO DETERMINE COMPLEX AND EMOTIONALLY CHARGED CASES.