Abstract
This article examines the mental impairment (insanity) defense in the Australian state of Victoria and argues that the defense is successful only when offenders suffer from psychotic mental illnesses. This raises the question about how non-psychotic offenders are dealt with by the courts when they claim 'mental impairment' for serious acts of violence such as homicide, particularly when a relatively large number of perpetrators involved in homicide suffer from non-psychotic illnesses like depression. The analysis shows that depressive illnesses do not reach the threshold for mental impairment (legal insanity) such that they mitigate violent criminal behavior, although they can, arguably, diminish culpability. This article draws upon existing literature, qualitative analysis of two court cases and semi-structured interviews with four legal representatives to make its conclusions.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 160-167 |
| Journal | International Journal of Law and Psychiatry |
| Volume | 37 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 31 Dec 2014 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Keywords
- Criminal Law and Procedure
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Depressed but not legally mentally impaired'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver