Explore BrainMass
Share

Insanity Defense in a Court Case

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Using the case of Ralph Tortortici found at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/crime/ralph/, would you please discuss the outcome under each of these insanity standards:
1 M'Naughten
2 Durham
3 A.L.I.
Using the standard, discuss how the evidence would be interpreted and predict the outcome. Be sure to interpret it through the lens of all three standards.

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 17, 2018, 1:00 pm ad1c9bdddf
https://brainmass.com/psychology/mental-health-and-the-law/insanity-defense-in-a-court-case-598528

Solution Preview

Greetings,

Hope you are well.

1- M'Naughten

Consider the M'Naugten standard assumption of rule is in criminal defendants who are found to be legally insane cannot be convicted of charges, in which, the mental defect is a disability. In design, the M'Naugten can reflect an individual that struggles with normal "thought processes" for properly dealing with reality within society. In the Ralph Tortortici case, the diagnosis occurred by Dr. Siegel that indicated an acute psychotic delusions mental instability. Thus, the research aim in connecting a possible outcome on M'Naugten is in using the noted mental heals professional diagnosis and observation in building evidence, accordingly, to the rule protocols in a court of law.

Aim in thinking the M'Naughten as a series of assessment in testing the individual for determining, in fact, the defendant is legally insane, ranging from; Model Penal Code to Irresistible Impulse Test. Keep in mind, the M'Naughten is in reflection to the nature of criminal defendant actually knew any crime being committed at the time of the incident. Try and connect the defense expert testimony and ...

Solution Summary

This solution provides a review into the insanity defense, as in, M'Naughten, Durham, A.L.I. in relation to the Ralph Tortortici.

$2.19
Similar Posting

Court cases involving insanity pleas

Scenario:

You are part of a fact finding panel for your state court system. The court has a concern over the methods in which persons who are mentally ill violent offenders are handled. You are charged with selecting a modern court case (past 30 years) in which a sanity issue arose regarding a violent offender. The case may involve a Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity Plea, or it may involve a directive by the court for a sanity hearing. You may also select a case with a court consideration of idiot status was determined.

I need help preparing a briefing report on the methods that were used to assess the defendant by the court in the case selected. Discuss the outcome of the case and the mechanism that resulted in the defendant's evaluation for sanity.

Articulate the mental disorder(s) being considered by the court in the case that you selected, and why this disorder would make the defendant unfit for trial.
Explain the relationship between the actions and behavior that would cause the court to remand the defendant for a mental evaluation.
Evaluate the outcome of the case in terms of the defendant, the victim, and the community.
Critique the court's decision in the case. Do you support the court's correct decision or challenge the court's decision with your supported reasons.

View Full Posting Details