Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should 'mentally disordered' murders get minimum sentences? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It seems sick to me that murderers can get their sentences reduced just because their brain is 'different' and thus make them do evil deeds such as murder, again and again. Should 'ill' murderers get their sentences reduced?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I doubt sentences would be reduced. I would imagine you're more likely to spend your days rotting in a high security psychiatric institue for an indeterminate amount of time as opposed to rotting away in a prison instead.

    I'm not sure which I would prefer, tbh.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm pretty sure that "insanity" as a defence is only applicable if you're not in control of your body when you commit a murder due to things like reflexes (say a bee stings you whilst driving, and you flinch and crash, killing someone) and sleep-walking.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    If you've got a mental health which causes your decision making to be unfounded and irrational, to the point where it's nigh on impossible to distinguish between right and wrong and thus you murder, harm people, it can be argued that it's not the person's fault. Whereas a mentally stable person will know that murder is wrong, if this logic is removed from a mentally unstable person and with the fact that mental disorders such as psychosis and schizophrenia drive individuals to harm others, then I think a certain amount of leeway is acceptable.

    Obviously each mental condition and crime committed is subjective and each case is individually unique and should be individually investigated.

    Just opinions.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mann18)
    I'm pretty sure that "insanity" as a defence is only applicable if you're not in control of your body when you commit a murder due to things like reflexes (say a bee stings you whilst driving, and you flinch and crash, killing someone) and sleep-walking.
    You don't end up in a mental hospital if you kill someone because you got a bee-sting and so crashed into someone!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    No because everyone would say they're not right in the head to get time knocked off
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mann18)
    I'm pretty sure that "insanity" as a defence is only applicable if you're not in control of your body when you commit a murder due to things like reflexes (say a bee stings you whilst driving, and you flinch and crash, killing someone) and sleep-walking.
    well thats not true

    In criminal trials, the insanity defenses are possible defenses by excuse, an affirmative defense by which defendants argue that they should not be held criminally liable for breaking the law because they were legally insane at the time of the commission of alleged crimes. A defendant attempting such a defense will often be required to undergo a mental examination beforehand. The legal definition of "insane" is, in this context, quite different from psychiatric definitions of "mentally ill". When the insanity defense is successful, the defendant is usually committed to a psychiatric hospital.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think mental state should be taken into account when being sentenced. Perhaps we should place more emphasis on counselling and phsyciatric help rather than prison sentences when it comes to people where their mental state may have affected their actions.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by didgeridoo12uk)
    well thats not true
    Correct, what I described is called automatism, my bad, I was confused, there's a case where the line between the two is blurred and I incorrectly remembered it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rmhumphries)
    You don't end up in a mental hospital if you kill someone because you got a bee-sting and so crashed into someone!
    Maybe not :p:

    But yeah, you're right, read above if you want to know why I said what I said.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Tbh odds are if your that damaged your not going to have your sentence reduced but your far moe likely to be locked up indefinitely
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It depends how 'mentally disordered' the person is. If they truly had no control over what they did and don't see why murder is wrong, then they should concentrate on rehabilitation more than prison. If they change, release them early. If they don't, keep them in prison+rehabilitation until they do because they're more of a threat to society than sane people.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Just because someone has a mental health problem even a severe mental illness doesn't mean they do not know right from wrong and shouldn't go to prison or even be hung,if the death penalty was brought back. Whether they understand what they did was wrong,should be considered by a consultant psychiatrist, if their crime attracted the death penalty, I if I was the judge would want them seem by several.But I would not be adverse to hanging a mentally ill person if he/she was judged to have realised their actions would result in death.

    I think if someone who committed murder is proven mentally retarded, and with a very low mental age, there is no way they should go to prison or be hung but society should be protected from them by them being placed in a mental institution for the rest of their lives. Mental illness,is rather more iffy in my opinion, as even for instance psychosis,people have different levels of functioning and insight into their illness.

    It is a matter of opinion but psychiatrists have come in for criticism in the past for letting out nutters, who go on to murder or rape because they believed they were on medication or had made a lot of progress. The problem is community care, is very poorly funded and people slip through cracks and disappear,not only that a hospital environment is rather different to real life,where eventually the former patients will be expected to manage their money, living in poor conditions perhaps deal with harrassment.

    I personally knowing this would never ,unless a case was very exceptional let out a mentally ill person if they had been known for violence in the past. It becomes further complicated when substance abuse is involved. I have read that often , a mentally ill person has been on cannabis or other drugs at the time when they do these violent acts .Again it's a lack of supervision while in the communinty,so personally we need to keep society safe and look after these people in a secure environment.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nayred)
    It seems sick to me that murderers can get their sentences reduced just because their brain is 'different' and thus make them do evil deeds such as murder, again and again. Should 'ill' murderers get their sentences reduced?
    There's a difference between forming intention and being unable to stop an action from occurring. If a defendant couldn't help but kill a person, and had no chance but to form the mental requirement, then it would be wrong to punish them - in the same way it would be wrong to punish a person who swerves when a bee flies into their window, as they're driving along, and kills a pedestrian. The law punishes under two main heads: 'guilty mind' and 'unlawful act'. Some crimes require only the latter is present - but murder can be reduced because of mental illness. The Mac' Naughton Rules give guidance to the court in many circumstances - and charges for murder are often reduced to manslaughter, when the necessary level of intention is not present, or when the defendant acts in the same way as any reasonable person would have (bearing in mind the defendant's attributes such as age and sex). The judge still has the power to punish any defendant convicted of manslaughter to life imprisonment, or for insanity - a plea which not many defendants choose - detention at 'her Majesty's pleasure'. Bearing in mind that rehabilitation and protection of the public are the main considerations in court - it would be wrong to find that all killers are equally evil. Obviously, your example (lets say a person who could not think about anything but playing ps2, because a firework hit him in the head) could not form the necessary level of intention for murder, and as such, in an ideal world, would be found to be insane and detained for ever.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nayred)
    It seems sick to me that murderers can get their sentences reduced just because their brain is 'different' and thus make them do evil deeds such as murder, again and again. Should 'ill' murderers get their sentences reduced?
    Thats a very interesting question. I can't make my mind up but if I'd had to choose one, I would probably say that those who are 100% mentally disabled actually should get lower sentences. I know it may sound harsh, but on the other hand it would sound harsh if you did give them the same full sentence. It often wouldn't be their fault.

    I would only do that if the person has a serious mental problem (not something like bad experience as a child...). So those who don't really know what they are doing on Earth. I mean the sentence won't affect them because they probably wouldn't know what it is all about. It would just cause more problems to their families.

    What would you say about this?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    All murderers have a mental disorder.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 1, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.