Citation

Hogg C. J. Crim. Law 2015; 79(4): 250-256.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0022018315596708

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This article takes an abolitionist position towards insane automatism (or 'the insanity defence'). With particular reference to Arlie Loughnan's concept of 'manifest madness', it argues that mentally ill defendants are poorly served not only by the insanity defence as currently formulated, but by any defence which focuses on their status as 'mentally ill' rather than the specific excusatory elements of that illness. It contends, however, that advocates for abolition should not assume that existing criminal defences are currently primed to account for those elements. What is required is a thoroughgoing reform of all criminal defences, with mentally ill and/or disordered defendants in mind, to which abolition of the insanity defence must be secondary.

Language: en