OBJECTIVE: This paper describes psychiatric and psychological defences to murder where the defence of insanity is not applicable. The charges of murder and manslaughter are outlined. Self-defence, sane and insane automatism, provocation, diminished responsibility, duress, necessity and novel defences are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The complexities of psychological and psychiatric expert evidence are highlighted as well as the fact that legal decisions are not always consistent with medical or scientific theory. It is concluded that this is a controversial and evolving area of mental health law and mental health professionals have an educative role and a responsibility to provide testimony that is supported by the best possible evidence.
OBJECTIVE: This paper describes psychiatric and psychological defences to murder where the defence of insanity is not applicable. The charges of murder and manslaughter are outlined. Self-defence, sane and insane automatism, provocation, diminished responsibility, duress, necessity and novel defences are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The complexities of psychological and psychiatric expert evidence are highlighted as well as the fact that legal decisions are not always consistent with medical or scientific theory. It is concluded that this is a controversial and evolving area of mental health law and mental health professionals have an educative role and a responsibility to provide testimony that is supported by the best possible evidence.
Authors: Francesca Ingravallo; Francesca Poli; Emma V Gilmore; Fabio Pizza; Luca Vignatelli; Carlos H Schenck; Giuseppe Plazzi Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2014-08-15 Impact factor: 4.062