The insanity defense states that mentally ill individuals who can’t distinguish between right and wrong can not be legally punished for their actions in the same way that a mentally healthy person would be. 46 states provide for this defense, but Kansas along with some other states do not.
James Kahler, a Kansas man, is currently being tried for several murders, and the definition of insanity is going under some scrutiny by the Justices. Kahler shot and killed his ex-wife, his former mother in law, and his two teenage daughters, but let his son get away because of his preference for him. While the evidence for Kahler qualifying for the insanity plea is fairly limited, Kansas law says that mental states are irrelevant so long as the defendent has the intent to kill.
On one hand, Justice Kagan said she couldn’t imagine Kahler being found not guilty on any basis of insanity, and Justice Roberts said the plea for insanity in his case was pretty weak. Another concern of the justices was that insane people would be unjustly tried and punished as sane people if the definition of insanity was made too strict.
The example given by Nina Totenberg, an affairs correspondent, was that to consider two men accused of murder. One man says that the man he murdered was a dog, and the other man says that a dog told him to kill the man. Clearly both of the accused are mentally ill in some form or other, and it would be unreasonable for Kansas law to draw the line between them just because the inent changes. The insane defense is reserved for those who can’t understand their behavior and where it lies between right and wrong, which can be a very difficult thing to prove one way or another. These questions aren’t easy, and it’s a difficult decision to make for these Justices.
Keeping the definition of the insanity defense general seems like the best course of action—since situations like these can be highly variable between situations, it’s critical that mentally ill individuals get help, particularly those who pose a danger to society.
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/07/768032974/supreme-court-term-opens-with-case-involving-the-insanity-defense
This defense is highly controversial, but I think that it should be allowed in all states. I think they should be allowed because it is ultimately the Justice's job to determine whether it is applicable. If it can't be argued then the justice's will deny their claim.
ReplyDelete