While the insanity defense is one of the most controversial criminal defense strategies, it is also the least used. The insanity defense declares that a criminal defendant shouldn’t be found guilty due to their insanity or mental-illness. The reasoning behind this defense is that the person who is being charged with a crime lacks the intent required to perform a criminal act because they either didn’t know the act is wrong or they couldn’t control their actions even if they knew the action was wrong.
This defense was used in that of Lorena Bobbitt’s case. Lorena’s husband, John Bobbitt, sexually and emotionally abused her throughout their marriage. On June 23, 1993 John arrived home highly intoxicated and raped his wife. After the incident, Lorena claims she went to the kitchen to grab a glass of water, but instead she saw a knife on her counter and, with rage, went back into her bedroom to cut her husband’s penis off. She then took the severed penis and drove to a nearby field to discard it. Ultimately, she called 911 and John was rushed to the hospital.
During the trial, Lorena revealed the details of her marriage and the abuse she had to endure throughout the years. Her defense claimed she had been suffering from clinical depression because of her husband’s cruel actions towards her. The Jury deliberated and Lorena was acquitted of her charges due to temporary insanity. However, she was ordered to undergo psychiatric evaluation for 45 days, but was released afterwards.
I believe that the insanity defense is completely plausible. If someone isn't in the right state of mind and can be found insane through psychiatric evaluation, they should be able to use it for their defense. However, in Lorena Bobbitt's case, I think she should've argued self defense. She was subject to continuous physical, emotional and sexual abuse at the hands of her husband, and when he raped her on June 23, she took what seemed to be a rational action at the time, she cut off his penis. In some sense, it can be seen that Lorena cut off what her husband was using to assault her, and this would stop the abuse. Since the self defense plea is the defendant using violence or deadly force in order to protect oneself or others from harm, it seems that plea would have benefitted Lorena more than the temporary insanity plea.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.justia.com/criminal/defenses/self-defense/
Lorena, herself, claims "she went to the kitchen to grab a glass of water, but instead she saw a knife on her counter and, with rage" she used it to harm her husband. She even called 911 because she knew what she had done was wrong and he needed medical care. I felt like she could have said it was self defense like Madison stated because it makes more sense then claiming she went insane.
ReplyDelete