The Insanity Defense | Documentary

Summary

The documentary on "The Insanity Defense" delves deep into the historical and legal nuances of pleading insanity in criminal cases. It traces the roots of the concept to medieval times when the mentally ill were treated with fear and violence. The narrative progresses through significant historical cases, such as that of Daniel M’Naghten in 1843, whose defense set foundational laws still debated today. It highlights infamous cases like those of John Hinckley and Jeffrey Dahmer, showcasing how the insanity defense is perceived, contested, and applied in modern legal systems. Despite its occasional success, the documentary underscores that the insanity plea is rarely used and even less frequently successful, often mired in public misunderstanding and sensationalism.

Highlights

• Medieval times viewed mental illness with superstitious fear, leading to inhumane treatments. 👻
• England's Bedlam became synonymous with chaos and horror as a mental institution. 😱
• The M’Naghten rule established a foundational standard for legal insanity in 1843. 📏
• John Hinckley's trial post-Reagan shooting caused public uproar over the insanity defense. 🇺🇸
• Misunderstandings prevail regarding the frequency and success rate of insanity defenses. 🔍
• Multiple high-profile cases paint a distorted picture of the defense's commonality and success. 🎨
• Juries without psychiatric expertise ultimately decide the outcomes of insanity defense pleas. 🗳️

Key Takeaways

• The insanity defense has historical roots dating back to medieval times, where mental illness was misunderstood and feared. 🕰️
• Bedlam, the first institution for the mentally ill, became an infamous tourist attraction highlighting historical misuse of mental health. 🏥
• Daniel M’Naghten's case in 1843 set a precedent but sparked ongoing debates over the insanity plea's legitimacy. ⚖️
• Public cases like John Hinckley’s highlight the divisive nature of the insanity defense in modern times. 📺
• Despite perceptions, the insanity defense is rarely successful and is often misunderstood by the public. 😮
• The criteria for legal insanity are stringent and not easily met, as demonstrated by cases like Jeffrey Dahmer's. 🚪
• Perceptions of the insanity defense are shaped by high-profile cases, yet it remains a complex and rarely winning strategy in real courtrooms. 🎭

Overview

The documentary narrates a chilling exploration into the treatment and perception of mental illness from medieval times to today. Initially, those displaying signs of mental illness were treated as outcasts or worse, often suffering brutal repercussions in societies steeped in superstition and misunderstanding. This era laid the foundation for the long and troubled history of legal insanity defenses, beginning with the establishment of Bedlam, a psychiatric institution infamous for its harsh conditions.

Central to the legal historical narrative is the M’Naghten rule, stemming from an 1843 English case that set a substantial legal precedent for determining insanity. The rule's stringent requirements for proving mental incapacitation have shaped the landscape of legal insanity defenses. The documentary discusses how this, and subsequent rulings, attempt to address the complex intersections of mental health and culpability in a legal setting, demonstrating through various high-profile cases the challenges courts face.

The film captures the sensationalism and misunderstanding often surrounding the insanity defense, particularly in high-stakes cases involving individuals like John Hinckley and Jeffrey Dahmer. These narratives mislead the public about the defense's frequency and success rate. Ultimately, the documentary argues that while the insanity defense is a critical legal tool, it is rarely the loophole it is perceived to be, instead reflecting an ongoing struggle to integrate mental health awareness into judicial processes.

Chapters

• 00:00 - 02:00: Introduction to Historical Treatment of Mental Illness The chapter 'Introduction to Historical Treatment of Mental Illness' discusses the societal attitudes and treatments of individuals with mental illness during Medieval Times in Western civilization. It highlights the prevalent fear, revulsion, and often violent treatment that these individuals faced during this period.
• 02:00 - 05:00: Development of Early Mental Health Institutions The chapter discusses the evolution of early mental health institutions, highlighting how individuals with mental illnesses were historically mistreated and misunderstood. In the past, they were often locked up and neglected, as they were believed to be possessed by demons or the devil. Many were brutally murdered or executed, becoming victims of religious fanaticism, particularly during the Inquisition in 13th-century Europe. The Roman papacy organized Crusades against those deemed heretics, further perpetuating the persecution of vulnerable individuals.
• 05:00 - 09:00: The Insanity Defense in Legal History The chapter discusses the historical context and evolution of the insanity defense, beginning in England where societal pressures led to a need to address individuals who were different, including the mentally ill. This need resulted in the establishment of facilities like The Priory of Saint Mary of Bethlehem Hospital in London, which opened in 1247 to treat and house those with mental illnesses.
• 09:00 - 11:00: Influence of Scientific Developments in the 19th Century In the early 1400s, the first institution dedicated to housing the mentally ill was established in the Western World. Initially intended to exclusively house the insane, the institution quickly gained a notorious reputation for its harsh treatment and appalling living conditions. Patients were often subjected to confinement, chained to walls, and tortured under misguided pretenses of therapeutic benefit. During this period, guidelines or procedures for managing the mentally ill were non-existent, and sanitary measures were not practiced or understood.
• 11:00 - 29:00: High-Profile Insanity Defense Cases The chapter delves into how upper-class members of London would visit a notorious hospital, later known as Bedlam, for entertainment. The institution housed mentally ill patients, often left in distressing conditions such as being doused in cold water or spun on rotating chairs. These patients were showcased to the public, highlighting the stark contrast between them and the societal elites who paid to observe their behavior, contributing to the institution's infamous reputation.
• 29:00 - 43:00: Criticism and Misconceptions of the Insanity Defense The chapter "Criticism and Misconceptions of the Insanity Defense" examines the historical and legal foundations of the insanity defense, highlighting its deep roots in legal tradition dating back to the 13th century. It discusses the period in the 19th century when public interest and media coverage of insanity cases became comparable to major tourist attractions like Westminster Abbey, illustrating the defense's controversial and chaotic reputation. English Lord Bractan's early work on mental deficiency laid the groundwork for this defense, emphasizing its longstanding role in addressing mental health within legal frameworks.

The Insanity Defense | Documentary Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 foreign [Applause] throughout Medieval Times in western civilization people who displayed any sign of mental illness were treated with fear revulsion and oftentimes violence the treatment of such people frequently
• 00:30 - 01:00 consisted of Simply locking them up in a dungeon and ignoring them they were considered possessed by demons or the devil many were murdered or burned at the stake victims of a misdirected religious fervor that claimed thousands of victims especially during the Inquisition in 13th century Europe organized Crusades against so-called Heretics were formed by the Roman papacy to persecute those of lesser faith soon the Inquisition was used to
• 01:00 - 01:30 severely punish political enemies criminals and the mentally ill in England pressures on the ruling classes forced them to deal with those who appeared different than others a place was needed to treat and house the mentally [ __ ] and others with mental afflictions that could not be explained as a result The Priory of Saint Mary of Bethlehem Hospital in London opened its doors in 1247. the hospital became the
• 01:30 - 02:00 first Institution for the mentally ill in the Western World when it began to house the insane exclusively in the early 1400s and it soon gained a reputation as a place of suffering and misery the living conditions for the patients were horrendous they were often chained to the wall and tortured under the premise that it was for their own good there were no guidelines or procedures on how to deal with the mentally ill at that time sanitary measures were unknown for the
• 02:00 - 02:30 most part patients were left screaming in the darkness alone sometimes doused in cold water or spun around in rotating chairs soon members of the London upper class began to tour the hospital for entertainment they were charged a fee to enter the institution and stare at the Unfortunate Souls who acted so much differently than themselves the hospital if it can be called that later became notorious under its better known name Bedlam a word in the English
• 02:30 - 03:00 language that has become synonymous with chaos and confusion during the 19th century when its popularity was at its highest Bedlam entertained more tourists than Westminster Abbey and the town of London the insanity defense has its roots firmly embedded in centuries of legal tradition as early as the 13th century the English Lord bractan established the principle of mental deficiency in human behavior
• 03:00 - 03:30 he said that some people simply do not know what they are doing and act in a manner as to be not far removed from the Brute from that concept Insanity came to mean that a person lacks the awareness of what he or she is doing and therefore cannot form an intent to do wrong since there was no malice in the intent of his or her actions then there could be no technical guilt the standard for
• 03:30 - 04:00 Insanity in the courts was determined to be such that a man must be totally deprived of his understanding and memory so as not to know what he is doing no more than an infant brute or a wild beast this wild beast standard was the insanity requirement of England's Courts for over a hundred years and any defendant who attempted to use the defense had to prove that he or she lacked the minimum understanding of a wild animal or infant
• 04:00 - 04:30 it wasn't until 1843 that a man named Daniel minatan committed a murder that would alter forever the history of jurisprudence in the western world in 1843 Daniel M Norton a Scottish Woodcutter shot and killed Edward Drummond secretary to England's prime minister Sir Robert peel in London he acted under the belief that he was actually shooting the Prime Minister because monoton believed there was a
• 04:30 - 05:00 plot against him when manortan reached trial his attorneys pleaded that he should be acquitted because he was obviously insane and he did not understand what he was doing Norton was later acquitted of the crime later that same year the House of Lords issued the following ruling to establish a defense on the ground of insanity it must clearly be proved that at the time of the committing of the act the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reason from disease of
• 05:00 - 05:30 the Mind as not to know the nature and quality of the ACT he was doing or if he did know it that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong this Egypt became known as the monoton rule and for over a century this was the standard for the insanity defense as for Daniel minortin after his acquittal he was sent to Bedlam and other institutions where he languished in the shadow world of the insane for several
• 05:30 - 06:00 decades until his death in 1863. the late 19th century was a time when scientific ideas were rampant this explosion of science was partly brought on by the publication in 1859 of one of the most influential books ever written the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin the darwinian concepts of survival of the fittest natural selection and hereditary traits revolutionized
• 06:00 - 06:30 biological science and were applied to many other disciplines ideas were evolving rapidly during this era in every medical scientific and psychological field things were changing quickly in the legal profession as well dedicated lawyers and judges searched for workable solutions to the controversies that plagued the nation's courts the confusing ideas about mental diseases and the complexities of the human mind did not lend themselves well
• 06:30 - 07:00 to the rigid dimensions of codified law a glaring example of that confusion was the murder trial of Charles gito the Assassin of President James Garfield in 1881. Kito was an erratic individual who suffered from some type of mental disorder most probably paranoia he had delusions that he should be appointed as ambassador to France because he wrote a speech for President Garfield which he imagined helped get Garfield elected in
• 07:00 - 07:30 1880. the speech in fact was never used but guito became despondent and bitter over this betrayal and plotted to get revenge against Garfield after stalking the president for almost a month he managed to shoot Garfield in the back at a Washington DC train station the president was not killed out right however he suffered with great pain for almost three months before he finally died on the night of September 19 1881. quito's trial was a sensation not only
• 07:30 - 08:00 because of the nature of his crime but because his unusual outbursts and behavior in court attracted widespread attention gito testified on his own behalf and stated I want to say right here in reference to protection that the deity himself will protect me that he has used all these soldiers and these experts and this honorable court and these councils to serve him and protect me
• 08:00 - 08:30 [Music] he went on to tell the court that he shot the president because God told him that Garfield was destroying the Republican Party and he must die to save the Democratic Party but the prosecutor U.S attorney Wayne Davids told the jurors it is very hard to conceive of the individual with any degree of intelligence at all incapable of comprehending that the head of a great constitutional republic is not to be shot down like a dog
• 08:30 - 09:00 Charles guitar was found guilty of murder on January 13 1882 upon hearing the verdict gito jumped to his feet and screamed you are all low consumer jackasses after reciting an incoherent poem in a child's voice on The Gallows gito was hanged on June 30 1882 although there was a strong public sentiment to punish gito despite his severe mental problems his case
• 09:00 - 09:30 underlined the need for change in how the courts dealt with the issue of insanity the insanity defense is a source of continuous disagreement among lawyers clinicians and the general public there is a very strong perception in America that defendants are abusing the defense to escape murder charges in the nation's courts on March 30th 1981 John Hinckley shot President Ronald Reagan and several of his aides on live television
• 09:30 - 10:00 virtually the entire world saw the shooting via endless replays over the next few weeks there was little doubt about who did the shooting and how Ronald Reagan eventually recovered so today we know his wounds were a lot more serious than we realized then press secretary James Brady suffered severe head wounds and was confined to a wheelchair as a result of his injuries on May 4th 1982 after a seven-week trial during which numerous psychiatrists
• 10:00 - 10:30 testified on his behalf Hinckley was found not guilty by a reason of insanity he was sent to a mental hospital in Washington D.C the outcome of the Hinckley case sent shockwaves throughout the nation's courts How could a man who shot the president in front of millions of people be found not guilty in 2016 a judge decided that Hinckley didn't need psychiatric care anymore because he wasn't a danger to himself or
• 10:30 - 11:00 others but there were still a lot of rules he had to follow in 2020 another decision said he could share his artwork writings and music publicly using his real name instead of staying Anonymous like before since then he has been posting his music on YouTube in June 2022 all the restrictions on him were lifted unconditionally one of the cornerstones of the criminal justice system in America is the concept of men's Raya a Latin phrase that
• 11:00 - 11:30 translates to State of Mind in order for a person to be held criminally liable in the courts our system demands that he or she must have Criminal Intent or awareness of the wrongfulness of the ACT if a person is mentally ill and unable to tell the difference between right and wrong for example then he or she cannot be held criminally culpable in our society that principle upholds the Dignity of
• 11:30 - 12:00 the court and ensures those without malicious intent such as the mentally [ __ ] will not be unfairly punished see my video about Joe Harrity for a fair example of such a case Sir William Blackstone the British legal scholar whose work was used as the foundation for English and American law for centuries wrote it's a lunatics are not chargeable for their own acts if committed when under these incapacities there are many false beliefs held by the public regarding the
• 12:00 - 12:30 utilization of the insanity defense at criminal trials the most widespread misperception is that ngri please are commonly used by defense attorneys to benefit their clients however there is abundant research that proves conclusively that just the opposite is true a study conducted in Wyoming in the early 1970s showed that the insanity defense was used in only 0.47 of all criminal cases in New Jersey a review of 32 000
• 12:30 - 13:00 criminal cases in 1982 discovered that the defense was raised in only 52 cases less than 0.2 percent of the total in New York City the insanity defense historically is used less than one in 700 cases other studies indicate very similar findings in almost every review of the insanity plea undertaken in America the results are the same this type of defense is used in the nation's courts only on very rare occasions
• 13:00 - 13:30 one such occasion that dramatized the issue of insanity was the Long Island Railroad killings in 1993 when a disturbed man named Colin Ferguson became front page news in media Rich New York City it was December 7th 1993 when Colin Ferguson 28 boarded a train in Long Island headed for New York City's Grand Central Station the railroad car was packed with commuters as the train pulled into the mammalian Avenue Station Ferguson pulled out a
• 13:30 - 14:00 semi-automatic weapon and began firing at random inside the commuter car several minutes later after some courageous passengers wrestled the madman to the floor six people were dead and 19 others were seriously wounded when Ferguson was charged in Criminal Court famed attorney William Kunstler and his assistant Ron Kuby agreed to represent him counselor and kubi decided to use something called the black rage defense they presented to the court that
• 14:00 - 14:30 Ferguson after years of living in a racist and oppressive Society was so consumed with anger that he just couldn't help killing white people Ferguson however disagreed he denied his role in The Killing and said he was framed by unknown persons Ferguson later fired his attorneys and won the right to represent himself the Court ruled that he was competent and what followed was one of the strangest criminal trials New York had ever witnessed it was a proceeding that angered many
• 14:30 - 15:00 people and brought into the public Arena once again how the law deals with the issue of insanity Ferguson was able to question many of the victims on the stand who actually saw him do the shooting but insisted he was innocent he rambled on endlessly in open court accusing the police the media and the American people of conspiring against him kubi later said that the proof of Ferguson's Insanity was that he
• 15:00 - 15:30 wouldn't plead insane he was found guilty in February 1993 and sentenced to life without parole he's too crazy to be told the Press another misperception of the insanity defense is that ngri please are always successful but the reality is exactly the opposite in the same Wyoming study mentioned previously only one person point ninety nine percent of those that use the defense was acquitted data
• 15:30 - 16:00 gathered in other studies show higher rates but considerably less than half of those who pled the insanity defense was successful in Hawaii between the years 1969 and 1976 less than 19 percent of those who pleaded Insanity were acquitted in New Jersey during 1982 the figure was 30 percent researchers in California Georgia New York and Montana uncovered similar
• 16:00 - 16:30 findings simply stated John Hinckley was one of the very few defendants acquitted by reason of insanity for decades the criteria used to establish a legitimate Insanity defense were very rigid sometimes the most bizarre behavior even when committed in public did not satisfy that standard one case from the 1940s that illustrates that point was the violent and vicious
• 16:30 - 17:00 tale of the Mad Dog espositos in New York City on January 14 1941 two brothers Anthony 35 and William Esposito 28 held up a payroll carrier for a linen company located at 34th Street and 5th Avenue in Manhattan they shot and killed the office manager of the firm without warning as he rode in an elevator when the brothers reached the street they were confronted by police officer Edward Ma during a foot chase down Fifth Avenue a
• 17:00 - 17:30 gunfight ensued which sent hundreds of pedestrians ducking for cover the brave officer managed to bring down William with a shot to the leg when the cop went to check on William the wounded man suddenly turned over and shot officer Maher several times killing him instantly several other people were wounded in the ongoing battle both brothers were captured after pedestrians and a passing cab driver subdued them when they reached trial in May of 1941 the Esposito Brothers based their
• 17:30 - 18:00 defense on Insanity please the death penalty was a very real threat during that period unlike today defendants were sentenced to death routinely and often the sentences were carried out without delay it was also common for several convicts to go to the chair for the same murder in court the espositos began a campaign of bizarre behavior to convince the court they were insane they banged their heads on the defense table until they bled they made animal sounds and howled
• 18:00 - 18:30 like wolves they ate Bits of Paper and anything else that was in front of them while the jury was present in the room they bucked like dogs and cried uncontrollably they drooled on the table and walked into the courtroom like apes the New York Press called them the Mad Dogs at the end of the trial judge John Fraser said that the laws should be enacted to keep people like the espositos out of the courtroom but even
• 18:30 - 19:00 all their hysterics could not persuade the court they were anything but vicious criminals on May 1st 1941 after a jury deliberated for just one minute a trial record that still stands today William and Anthony Esposito were found guilty of murder in the first degree and sentenced to die and sing sing's electric chair but the Mad Dogs still weren't finished in the end William and Anthony Esposito
• 19:00 - 19:30 lay in their cots all day long eating nothing and groaning throughout the day and night neither of the brothers weighed more than 80 pounds on March 12 1942 they were carried to the electric chair unconscious already near death and immediately executed the Mad Dog espositos were violent criminals whose Behavior shocked the public but never did their actions constitute legal Insanity the espositos suffered the
• 19:30 - 20:00 ultimate penalty for their crime but their attempt at hiding behind the insanity plea failed for those that succeed there is a public perception that the defendant walks out of the courtroom a free individual since such defendants are found not guilty it may not be illogical to believe that they face no prison terms but again that is rarely if ever the reality Most states require that a defendant be committed to a mental institution for a
• 20:00 - 20:30 period of at least one year and the most severely Disturbed inmates may never get out of the institution the majority of states have no set limit on the amount of time convicted defendants may spend in confinement as long as they meet the criteria that sent them to the facility initially a similar fate May await those ruled incompetent to stand trial at the infamous Matia 1 state hospital for the insane in New York a census was
• 20:30 - 21:00 taken of 1062 patients in the year 1965 it was found that 208 were being held from 20 to an incredible 64 years some of those were never convicted of any crime whatsoever through a combination of antiquated laws neglect and retribution some prisoners spent their entire lives in institutions far longer than they would have spent in jail had they actually been convicted of a criminal offense but it simply seems to be part of the historical pattern of
• 21:00 - 21:30 Abandonment and fear that Society has practiced against the mentally ill for centuries the monoton rule was not without criticism some Scholars felt that the rule was too rigid and would not excuse anyone from Criminal conduct except the most severely mentally ill the law many people felt should be more flexible in 1886 the Parsons versus Alabama decision established additional criteria for the insanity defense the court decided that a person could
• 21:30 - 22:00 utilize the insanity defense if he or she could prove that by reason of duress of mental disease he had so far lost the power to choose between right and wrong and to avoid doing the acting question as that his free agency was at the time destroyed it became known as the irresistible impulse test or as an earlier Court in England called it the policeman at the elbow test
• 22:00 - 22:30 in other words if the person would have committed the crime even if a policeman was standing next to him then the ACT could be characterized as an irresistible impulse because no sane person would commit a criminal act in the presence of a law enforcement agent but what exactly was an irresistible impulse how is it measured and how can one tell if another could resist an Impulse many in the legal profession felt that this rule would allow criminal defendants to escape guilty verdicts by
• 22:30 - 23:00 fakery and manipulation of the Courts subsequent rulings in the nation's courts like Sinclair versus the state of Mississippi which declared that sanity is an essential element of men's Ray Washington State versus Strasbourg and Leland versus Oregon interpreted and refined the mem Natan rule under varying circumstances then in 1954 a court of appeals in Washington DC presided over by Judge David basilan heard the Durham case and transformed the insanity landscape
• 23:00 - 23:30 once again the Durham versus the United States decision in 1954 widened the scope of the psychological assessment of defendants and opened the door for an avalanche of expert psychiatric testimony in the Durham case the Court ruled that a person could not be held criminally responsible if his act was the product of a mental disease or defect the courts now had new ambiguous words to deal with
• 23:30 - 24:00 product and mental defect later the phrase diminished capacity also began to enter into the nation's courts the idea that a person who commits a criminal act was acting under a lesser capacity of understanding than was acceptable took hold the American law Institute the Ali established a model penal code in 1970 that was adopted by a number of states eager to resolve the conflicts brought on by increasing the frequency of the
• 24:00 - 24:30 insanity defense the Ali model stated that a defendant is not responsible for a criminal offense if at the time of such conduct as a result of a mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law it seemed not to matter that as hard as the courts tried to define the limit and
• 24:30 - 25:00 scope of a defense based on the mental stage of a defendant at the time of the offense there was always a problem with its application by 1972 however the Durham test as an effective standard for the nation's courtrooms was over it was simply too broad and gave the psychiatric profession too much power in Criminal Court but no single case caused the Durham experiment to fail rather it was the accumulation of 18 years of problems and
• 25:00 - 25:30 Patchwork Solutions and above all to simple exasperation however the newer guidelines provided the foundation for a wide array of ingenious and some say frivolous defense strategies one of the most famous was the twinkie defense of the late 1970s in a notorious murder trial that took place in San Francisco in 1979 a former police officer Dan White was accused of the murders of Mayor George Moscone and
• 25:30 - 26:00 an administrative aide named Harvey Milk that white committed these murders was never in dispute since he shot both men at midday inside City Hall but at trial the defense claimed that white was suffering from a mental lapse brought on by a series of events in his life that left him temporarily insane psychologists who testified at his murder trial postulated that white was not responsible for the murders even though he carried extra ammunition with
• 26:00 - 26:30 him to City Hall and reloaded between killings his attorney said that a depression put him into an altered state that changed his behavior to such a degree that he began to eat junk food something he had never done before according to his defense one psychiatrist testified I think that on the day of the crimes he really had no meaningful rational capacity to carefully weigh the considerations for and against and rationally decide on a
• 26:30 - 27:00 course of action he couldn't think carefully about what he was going to do although it was later called the twinkie defense by the local press the correlation between junk food and White's Behavior was never made at the trial this was a falsehood that has been repeated many times in hundreds of press accounts of the trial White's attorneys offered evidence that the previously health-conscious defendant began to eat Twinkies in
• 27:00 - 27:30 another junk food as a result of his severe depression but the characterization stuck in the Dan White case will always be remembered as the time junk food caused a man to go crazy and commit murder white was convicted of manslaughter and as a result he received a much lighter sentence as opposed to a first-degree murder conviction the decision ignited riots in San Francisco's gay community of course this
• 27:30 - 28:00 type of defense is not as common as the Press believes but it demonstrates what can be done under the elusive definitions of the Durham Rule and diminished capacity defenses eventually the Durham rule was abandoned in favor of the substantial capacity test this criteria was in effect a combination of the monoton rule and the irresistible impulse test under monoton alone a defendant was required to show a complete failure to
• 28:00 - 28:30 distinguish between right and wrong this compromise at least to some seemed acceptable to the courts for Dan white though the diminished capacity defense worked he spent five years in prison for a double murder and was paroled in 1985. a few months later Dan White took his own life an even more disturbing case than the twinkie defense took place in New York City in the late 1970s officer Robert torsny 34 was an
• 28:30 - 29:00 eight-year veteran of the nycpd on Thanksgiving Day 1976 he was scheduled to work a night tour and was extremely unhappy about being away from his family in his police memo book which is a diary of each officer's work day torsney wrote Happy working felony Thanksgiving for that day's entry that night he and his partner received a radio dispatch to respond to the Cyprus houses a public housing development in East New York Brooklyn
• 29:00 - 29:30 the job was man with a gun they investigated the job without incident and after taking some information from a few tenants they exited the building onto the street outside the young officers confronted several teenagers one of the teenagers Randolph Evans 15 called out to tosny and asked if his apartment was searched without warning towards me suddenly pulled out his service revolver and shot
• 29:30 - 30:00 the boy dead from a distance of about two feet towardsney later testified he was talking to me I don't remember exactly I remember not being in my body sort of the cop walked over to the police car without saying a word and sat in the front seat tosny was later arrested for this cold-blooded killing which was widely reported in the Press his murder trial began in November of 1977 against a backdrop of racial
• 30:00 - 30:30 suspicion and accusations Towson he was white and Evans was black officer torsny later told a psychiatrist I can't say I like black people but I don't let that affect me there's a lot of violence down there my life is in danger one defense witness was Dr Daniel Schwartz chief of forensic psychiatry at Kings County Medical Center a familiar witness in New York City's courts in previous years he had been appointed to examine David Berkowitz the Son of Sam
• 30:30 - 31:00 killer and David Chapman the Assassin of John Lennon up to that time Dr Schwartz testified in well over 100 trials after interviewing tozny on three occasions Dr Schwartz concluded that the officer fired his weapon while he was suffering from a psychomotor seizure a sort of mini stroke that leaves no telltale signs and may never return again Dr Schwartz claimed that officer Torsen has suffered from an extremely rare condition called automatism of Penfield
• 31:00 - 31:30 apparently this Affliction was so rare that few had ever heard of it before the trial but towards in his testimony was in direct conflict with psychiatric opinions of his behavior his statements in court claimed self-defense Evans was still talking and pulling out a silver object which looked like the barrel of a gun oh he told the court even so after just several hours of deliberations the jury found officer torsley Not Guilty by reason of insanity over the next few years the New York
• 31:30 - 32:00 Mental Health Community struggled with how to deal with officer tosny who was convicted of no crime showed no signs of being mentally ill and yet was commanded by the courts to remain in a mental hospital to be treated for a disease that didn't exist after two years of wrangling with the courts during which tonsi was often permitted to come and go at will and spend most of his time at home with his family he became a free man Justice at least the way it was defined in this case had been served America's standards for the insanity
• 32:00 - 32:30 defense During the period 1954-1984 received a great deal of criticism because of cases like tozny and white psychiatrists were given a powerful voice in the nation's courts and the results could often be infuriating to the public psychologists whose profession revolves around the endless ambiguities of the human mind were asked to make decisive judgments about an individual after
• 32:30 - 33:00 seeing a prisoner only once or twice this was absurd according to many people sometimes psychologists treat their patients for years in dozens of sessions without coming to a solid conclusion or understanding of their mental problems and those judgments by court-appointed psychiatrists could have a tremendous impact on a criminal trial and its outcome psychiatrists and psychologists are often put in the same position as economists who are asked to predict things that no one is capable of
• 33:00 - 33:30 predicting those with the honesty and realism to say they can't do it are likely to be brushed aside writes Thomas Sowell in the insane Insanity defense psychiatrists also have been known to slant their findings toward the side that pays them this is a dangerous tendency that corrupts testimony and blurs the truth in front of a jury that is already suspicious of expert psychological testimony that suspicion
• 33:30 - 34:00 has been fostered by some spectacular failures and abuses by psychiatrists who explain the behavior of criminals with the twisting idiom of clinical definitions and psychiatrists themselves are notorious for their disagreements on the same issues for every psychiatrist that testifies on the stability of a defendant another one will quickly follow and will testify to a completely opposite conclusion frequently there is no common consensus
• 34:00 - 34:30 among psychiatrists a fact that has devalued the profession in the eyes of the public and lessened the impact of their testimony in a court of law what does it matter if a defendant had a less than perfect childhood how does that relate to a vicious murder that may have been committed 20 or 30 years later or as Thomas maida writes in crime and Madness the psychiatric testimony can send him to prison or send him to a hospital or put him on probation and
• 34:30 - 35:00 what is it that you need to know to make that decision to know that the person had a poor upbringing that he masturbated as a child just what is it that you need to know there is also the natural danger that clinicians mostly identify with those on their own economic and social levels when dealing with patients who are much different than themselves psychiatrists can be oblivious to their problems one forensic psychologist went
• 35:00 - 35:30 so far as to say I hate to say this but I don't like to work with poor people they are talking about stuff that doesn't interest me undoubtedly few doctors could be as honest another common problem is forensic psychologists are paid professionals and therefore usually accessible to only the wealthy class such a case was a strange story of John Dupont heir to the Dupont family fortune and the wealthiest man ever to be charged with murder in American history
• 35:30 - 36:00 in the fall of 1995 the local police were called to the 800 acre estate in Pennsylvania of John Dupont 57 an heir to the DuPont chemical Fortune Newton Police Chief Lee Hunter went to the DuPont Mansion as a result of a request by the family lawyer when the police chief arrived John Dupont told him that he thought he was attacked in his sleep by a wrestler who was living on his property Dupont was an avid wrestling
• 36:00 - 36:30 fan and donated large sums of money to the Olympic wrestling team at that time his wealth was estimated to be around 250 million dollars in the private gym where the athletes trained a plaque read you can't just take it to the top you have to take it over the top Dupont told Chief hunter that there was a conspiracy to ruin his name and if it wasn't stopped the Russian army was sure to invade Newton Township during the conversation Dupont referred to himself as the holy child
• 36:30 - 37:00 on January 26 1996 Dupont his mental condition deteriorating and feelings of acute paranoia consuming him drove over to the home of David Schultz a 1984 Olympic gold medalist who lived in a house on DuPont's estate while Schultz's wife looked on in horror Dupont shot and killed David with a 38 caliber handgun in the driveway of his home immediately after the shooting Dupont went back to his Mansion where he held
• 37:00 - 37:30 off an army of police for three days he was arrested when he ventured outside his home to fix a heater which police had turned off in court DuPont's lawyers pleaded an insanity defense they said his mental condition had gone downhill ever since his mother died in 1988. afterward he took to wandering his vast estate armed with handguns and acting erratically he believed he was the Dalai Lama and spoke of himself in exalted and exaggerated terms there were also rumors
• 37:30 - 38:00 of cocaine use and Dupont told friends he believed he was about to be assassinated psychologists testified that Dupont was mentally unbalanced and could not be held responsible for his conduct Dupont himself later said I wish to apologize to Marty Schultz and her children I'm very sorry for what happened but the insanity defense was eventually rejected the prosecution was able to show that Dupont knew that what he did was wrong
• 38:00 - 38:30 and appreciated the wrongfulness of his conduct they used his three-day standoff as evidence that he knew shooting Schultz was wrong and that he knew he could be arrested for The Killing during that standoff Dupont asked for his lawyer over 100 times indicating that he was fully aware of the nature of his act and the need for legal representation after seven days of deliberations he was found guilty of third degree murder and sentenced to 13
• 38:30 - 39:00 to 30 years the acquittal of John Hinckley in 1982 set off a Groundswell of criticism against the insanity plea it was thought that lawyers had manipulated the courts and abused constitutional Protections in order to set a guilty man free [Music] many people lawyers legislators and newspaper editors called for the abolition of the insanity defense over the next few years 39 States made
• 39:00 - 39:30 dozens of changes in their laws regarding Insanity please Utah and Idaho completely abolished the defense at criminal trials there was a strong perception that the insanity defense was a loophole in the law that let murderers Escape Justice Congress passed major legislation which made sweeping changes in the way the insanity plea is used in American courts but it's not only defendants and attorneys who manipulate the insanity
• 39:30 - 40:00 defense journalists and politicians also abused The ngri Plea for their own reasons politicians use it as a vehicle to capture the Public's attention and journalists report on it because they are aware there is a great deal of public interest in the subject but rarely do they explore the issue with the kind of attention and accuracy it deserves as we have seen statistics confirm that the plea is vastly exaggerated as a loophole and rarely does it get anyone
• 40:00 - 40:30 off a criminal charge but the common understanding of The Plea is exactly the opposite Samuel Walker writes this misunderstanding explains the fact that nearly half thought it should be abolished and an incredible 94.7 percent thought it should be reformed of course any criminal defendant can raise the issue of insanity which is his or her right to do actually succeeding in that defense is
• 40:30 - 41:00 another issue entirely even Kip Kinkel 17 who shot 29 people in an Oregon school Rampage in 1998 was unable to substantiate an insanity defense so were David Berkowitz Ted Bundy Sirhan Sirhan Henry Lee Lucas Charles Manson and John Wayne Gacy but since the insanity defense is utilized almost exclusively in murder cases it is extremely rare in any other type of offense the publicity it receives is far
• 41:00 - 41:30 out of proportion to its use it has become part of the promotional apparatus of high-profile criminal cases in modern times the trials of Jeffrey Dahmer Hinckley David Berkowitz and the Lorena Bobbitt mutilation case are simply not typical of most criminal trials held in America any more than O.J Simpson was a typical murder defendant it is simply incorrect to assume that what happened in the O.J Simpson trial happens in murder trials across the country
• 41:30 - 42:00 and yet it is not difficult to find a press story or a television talk show that laments the OJ trial as symbolic of all that is wrong with criminal justice in America nothing could be further from the truth since the Simpson trial is about as far as one can get from the ordinary workings of our criminal justice system legal Scholars judges attorneys and clinicians have tried for hundreds of years to come to some sort of mutually acceptable understanding of what criteria should be used to gauge a
• 42:00 - 42:30 person's culpable mental state it hasn't been easy the complex turnings of the human mind are not so easily deciphered according to a prepared script even if the insanity defense were eliminated tomorrow it would not eradicate the issues under consideration defense attorneys would still have to address culpable mental state and so would prosecutors men's reassessment is open to either side consider the Jeffrey Dahmer case Dharma was arrested in Milwaukee in 1991
• 42:30 - 43:00 after he had killed at least 13 victims his apartment contained the remains of many young men who he had brutally murdered and dissected he poured acid on his victims cut them into pieces and preserved their heads and genitals he treated preserved and decorated the skulls of his victims his crimes are a Litany of perversion and torture that is rare even for sexually motivated serial killers in court his attorneys attempted to
• 43:00 - 43:30 plead Dharma Not Guilty by reason of insanity but prosecutors were able to prove that Dharma knew full well that killing was against the law and what he was doing was wrong the insanity plea was not accepted in his case if someone like Dharma could not be categorized as legally insane then it stands up to reason that the criteria for Insanity must surely be a difficult standard to meet this is the reality of the insanity defense in America difficult to plead seldom used and almost never successful
• 43:30 - 44:00 but in that small number of cases where it is successful it is sometimes manipulated or abused in a way that often grabs headlines and captures the imagination of the public ultimately only a jury can decide the issue of insanity which in itself may be the most controversial aspect of the insanity defense in other words people who have no training in the field rarely come into contact with the mentally ill and have a
• 44:00 - 44:30 minimal understanding of the issues involved make legal long-lasting judgments that are frequently based on shifting criteria or as U.S journalist bugs Bear Once wrote it's impossible to tell where the law stops and Justice begins [Music]
• 44:30 - 45:00 thank you
• 45:00 - 45:30 [Music] thank you [Music]
• 45:30 - 46:00 foreign