Insanity and Crime
| Published date | 01 April 1929 |
| Author | Harry L. Stephen |
| Date | 01 April 1929 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X2900200205 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Insanity and Crime
By SIR HARRY L.
STEPHEN,
LL.M.
THE law of England as to the relation of insanity and crime
is
that'
No act is a crime if the person who does it is at the
time when it is done prevented [either by defective mental
power or] by any disease affecting his mind (a) from knowing
the nature and quality of his
act;
or
(b)
from knowing
that
the act is
wrong;
[or
(c)
from controlling his own conduct,
unless the absence of the power of control has been produced
by his own default].'
These words are taken from the late Sir James Stephen's
Digest
of
the Criminal Law, and the author states
that
the
words in brackets are doubtful though he considers
that
they
are correct.
There
is not enough doubt about the words in
the first bracket, referring to mental defect, to make it worth
while to consider their correctness.
The
words in
the
second
bracket which could make what is usually described as an
uncontrollable impulse a good defence to a criminal charge,
provided of course
that
the
impossibility of control is caused
by mental disease or- mental defect, raise a more serious
difficulty.
To
the ordinary man it may appear self-evident
that
if by reason of a mental disease or defect a man
could not help committing what he knew to be a crime he
ought not to be punished for committing it.
The
lawyer's
difficulty is that he very properly wants
the
law to be laid
down in
words;
he wants those words to be as definite as
possible; and he finds any words
that
can be provided, such as
those for example quoted from Sir James Stephen, too vague
for practical use. Without ascending into those realms of
thought where Free Will is opposed
to
Necessity, it is plain
that
the
question whether an impulse could or could not have
been resisted is a very wide one, and
that
the
words quoted
218
To continue reading
Request your trial