CRM 200 Lecture Notes - Lecture 8: Insanity Defense, Endangerment, Actus Reus
27 Nov 2015
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
Introduction: verdict/outcome for not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. Incapable of knowing what they did was wrong. Outcome does not appear acquittal (they do not automatically get released) Subject to some sort of consideration from professional medicals to determine if they are a harm to society. Section 16 of the criminal code of canada: outcome of successful automatism defence. Impaired consciousness or unconsciousness performed an act involuntarily example: sleep walking. Defense is very rarely invoked and rarely successful: both defences require accused to prove on a balance of probabilities. Burden of proof is on the accused. Burden of proof is a low threshold compared to reasonable doubt, which is a higher threshold. Procedural considerations in the mental disorder defense: unfitness to stand. Section 672. 23(1): unfit to stand trial: balance of probabilities. Unable to understand the nature or object of proceedings. Unable to understand possible consequences of the proceedings.
