insanity

• insanity cases in order

  mc'naghten

  clarke

  sullivan

  burgess

  kemp

  sullivan

  hennessy

  oye

  windle

  johnson

  coley
• the defendant could use the defence of insanity - full defence - the burden of proof is on the defence team to prove the D was suffering from insanity based on balance of probabilities
• rules of insanity set out in the case of Mc'Naghten
• rules -

  1. defect of reason
  2. caused by a disease of the mind
  3. defendant must not know the nature and quality of their act
• defect of reason

  D's powers of reasoning must be impaired

  clarke - must be more than absent-mindedness

  sullivan - can be temporary or permanent
• caused by a disease of the mind

  can include a mental or physical disease and can be temporary

  burgess - includes sleepwalking

  kemp - hardening of the arteries

  sullivan - epilepsy

  hennessy - diabetes caused by internal factor due to not taking insulin
• d must not know the nature/quality of act


  oye - defendant must not know the nature or quality of their act

  windle - if they did know it is wrong they must not know it is legally wrong

  johnson - if suffering from delusions but know the nature/quality of act then defence will fail
• coley - if defendant is voluntarily intoxicated then this is an external factor and cannot rely on the defence