Insanity/Insane Automatism

• Three elements to prove insanity:

  Three elements based on the M'Naghten) case:

  1. D was suffering from a DEFECT OF REASON.
  2. This was as a result of a DISEASE OF THE MIND.
  3. This caused D not to know the NATURE AND QUALITY OF HIS ACT or NOT TO KNOW HE WAS DOING WRONG.
• 1. Defect of reason

  D's powers of reasoning must be impaired - cannot just have "not used them"

  Must be more than absent-mindedness or confusion.

  R v Clarke - woman charged with shoplifting, said she had no recollection of putting items in her bag - defence not allowed.
• 2. Disease of the mind

  Defect must be due to a disease of the mind.

  It is a legal term, not a medical term and pplied to "any mental or physical disease which affects the mind" (R v Kemp)

  Examples of legal diseases of the mind:

  • Hardening of arteries (Kemp)
  • Epilepsy (Sullivan)
  • Diabetes (Hennessy) - failed to take insulin, took a car and drove off.
  • Sleepwalking (Burgess)

  EXCEPTION - (R v Quick) - D took insulin but failed to eat enough - D's state was due to an external cause therefore NOT insanity.

  Insulin NOT administered = insanity

  Insulin administered - N.I. Automatism.
• 3. Not knowing the nature and quality of the act

  Refers to the physical character of the act.

  Two ways this may be the case:

  Either:

  1. Because he is in a state of unconsciousness or impaired consciousness.
  2. Due to his mental condition he does not understand or know what he is doing.

  D may be in an automatic state so he doesn't know what he's doing.

  D may also be not aware of the actions due to suffering from delusions (R v Oye).
• 3. Or D did not know what he was doing was wrong

  'Wrong' means legally wrong, not morally wrong.

  If D knows that something is legally wrong he will be guilty and cannot use the defence, even if he is suffering from a mental illness.

  Cases:

  D knew it was wrong - R v Windle

  D did not know it was wrong - R v Johnson
• Consequences of insanity verdict:

  If D proves insanity then the verdict is "Not Guilty by reason of insanity"

  Under s5 Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964, the judge can decide to apply:

  • a hospital order
  • a supervision order
  • absolute discharge

  If the crime is murder, the judge must apply an indefinite hospital order under s24(1)(3) Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004.