Explore BrainMass

Explore BrainMass

    Insanity Defense in a Court Case

    This content was COPIED 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 June 2, 2020, 1:27 am ad1c9bdddf

    Solution Preview


    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.