Definition – M’Naughten Rules 1843 =
“labouring under such a defect of reason,
arising from a disease of the mind, that he did
not know the nature and quality of the act he
was doing; or if he did know it, that he did not Capacity Defences – Insanity
know that what he was doing was wrong”
M’Naughten rules:
Key Points: 1. Arising from a disease of the mind =
Needs ME;
1. D is presumed sane;
Must be caused by an Internal factor (R v Kemp).
AR:
2. Did not know the nature and quality of the act =
2. Prosecution, defence
Needs to not know the physical nature of act due
and judge can raise
to an impairment or state of unconsciousness
issue of insanity;
regardless of a mental condition.
3. BOP on D to prove
3. Labouring under a defect of reason =
on a Balance of
Probabilities; Deprived of power to reason (R v Clarke –
not including absentmindedness or
confusion).
4. Judge decides if D is
Trial of Lunatics Act 1883 of not guilty by the 4.That he did not know that what he was doing
fit to plead. MR:
was wrong
- Defence will; fail if D understood their actions were legally wrong.
-^not morally wrong (R v Johnson affirmed R v Windle on this)
If successful returns a special verdict of not guilty under s(2) of the Trial of Lunatics Act 1883
“labouring under such a defect of reason,
arising from a disease of the mind, that he did
not know the nature and quality of the act he
was doing; or if he did know it, that he did not Capacity Defences – Insanity
know that what he was doing was wrong”
M’Naughten rules:
Key Points: 1. Arising from a disease of the mind =
Needs ME;
1. D is presumed sane;
Must be caused by an Internal factor (R v Kemp).
AR:
2. Did not know the nature and quality of the act =
2. Prosecution, defence
Needs to not know the physical nature of act due
and judge can raise
to an impairment or state of unconsciousness
issue of insanity;
regardless of a mental condition.
3. BOP on D to prove
3. Labouring under a defect of reason =
on a Balance of
Probabilities; Deprived of power to reason (R v Clarke –
not including absentmindedness or
confusion).
4. Judge decides if D is
Trial of Lunatics Act 1883 of not guilty by the 4.That he did not know that what he was doing
fit to plead. MR:
was wrong
- Defence will; fail if D understood their actions were legally wrong.
-^not morally wrong (R v Johnson affirmed R v Windle on this)
If successful returns a special verdict of not guilty under s(2) of the Trial of Lunatics Act 1883
