Important to note here is that proof of mental illness alone is not enough. Such a defense places an affirmative burden (meaning the defendant has the responsibility) to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence (a lower standard than beyond a reasonable doubt) that: 1) They suffer from a mental disease or defect (or a severe abnormal mental condition that grossly and demonstrably impairs their perception) and 2) that the mental disease or defect rendered them unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct at the time of the offense. However, an individual may avoid criminal responsibility by invoking the insanity defense. But what exactly are they looking for and does any evidence carry more emphasis over others? What Must You Prove?Īs a general rule, the State of Indiana must prove each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt to convict a defendant. Left with answering the question whether a particular individual in any criminal case meets that criteria is the “trier of fact” or the jury or trial judge. Central to the debate is the recognition that, when a mental illness renders a person incapable of distinguishing right from wrong, the law excuses their would be criminal conduct. ![]() ![]() For nearly two centuries, the concept of the “ insanity defense” has been debated and changed in Indiana’s Appellate Courts.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |