Innocent by reason of insanity?

[HydrogenBond]

I would like to analyze the psychological differences between people who are guilty of murder and those found innocent by reason of insanity. Before beginning, this is my own theory based on observation of internal data. It may not correlate with existing data and understanding and is not based on such data.

 

If someone is insane, it is almost like another person inside is doing the activity. This other person is often caused by renegade personality software that splits off from the ego. Murder is often more than a sudden impulse. A sudden impulse could be simply explained as biochemical in origin. Murder can also be connected to a very complex behavioral manifestation that can take some time to fully play out. The latter makes the insanity plea hard to determine since it often appears there is enough time for choice to enter the picture.

 

In the case of legal insanity, the ego (choice) is working at low power. The software contains the majority energy, driving the behavior dynamics apart from the ego. In such a case, the person or ego is not really responsible since their will and control is very low, due to its low energy level. They can watch, but not have a lot of control over the behavior. Treatment such as drugs, helps shut off the software, but often requires constant useage, or the software may come back to life.

 

In the case of premeditated murder, the ego is powered up. The ego is recieving energy from the renegade software. Under those conditions the ego has more willpower due to its higher energy level, and has more of a choice as to whether it will reinforce the impulses from the software or fight against these impulses. It can use the fear of law. If it goes along with the software, it can help the software by providing logic lines, i.e, justificiation and rational planning. The result is premeditated murder.

 

If science could measure the ego's power level and separate it from the energy affects of renegade personality software, this would be a useful tool for determining the validity of an insanity defense. It is not easy to tell the difference with external observation since coaching can help create the outward symptoms, especially with a high energy ego. A good (ego-centric) acter can play the insanity role in a TV movie and win the hearts of the audience.

 

One possible experiment that may help create a differentiation between ego power levels are contained in the observations of bi-polar disorders. The manic is usually the ego working at higher power and the depression side has the ego working at lower power. Caffeine will also increase the power level of the ego. This last point is based on waking in the morning still half asleep, i.e., ego is at very low power during sleep, but powers up noticeably with some coffee.

[UncleAl]

You are personally responsible and liable for every act of authority you commit. Anything else is deferment to vermin defining truth and morality by convenience of the moment.

[CraigD]

If someone is insane, it is almost like another person inside is doing the activity

Only a small fraction of mental disorders can be characterized as “like another person inside” – a famous, but very rare, diagnosis being Disassociative Identity Disorder, more recognizable by its older name, Multiple Personality Disorder. Though there’s controversy over whether this condition has actually ever occurred, most clinicians believe that is has, but is very rare – probably fewer than 1000 people have had it in the last 200 years. Brain imaging of people with DID reveals very atypical pattern of metabolism, suggesting that the several personalities are physically separate in the brain.

 

Most mentally ill people are self destructive rather than criminal, and are rarely subject to criminal prosecution, other than for attempted suicide. The mental disorder most associated with serious criminal behavior is paranoid schizophrenia. Although paranoid schizophrenics often have elaborate delusional systems that may include the idea that they are being controlled by other people or beings, they don’t experience disassociation – that is, they don’t stop being themselves.

 

A paranoid schizophrenic believes himself to be threatened. He may commit violent, even murderous crimes, believing himself to be acting in self defense. IMO, such people should be subject to the same legal sanctions as a psychological normal person who acts violently or murderously under the mistaken believe that they are acting in self defense.

If science could measure the ego's power level and separate it from the energy affects of renegade personality software

I doubt that a rigorous science of the mind will contain the term “ego” – though “personality software” seems a promising term. The idea of a central self, or ego, is central to psychodynamic theories of personality, which appeared in the late 19th century, and reached the height of their popularity in the mid 20th century, following the major works of Freud and other psychodynamic theorists in and following the beginning of the 20th century.

 

Psychodynamic theories, while interesting and influential in many of the sciences and liberal arts, have rarely be validated by objective data. Increases understanding of behavior based on neurology has thus far produced little evidence of a central “self”, or other features of the id/ego/superego or similar psychodynamic theories.

 

One of the main problem that court psychologists must address is determining if a person is legally not responsible for their actions by reason of insanity, or pretending insanity to escape punishment. I’m optimistic that scientific advances, mostly in the area of brain imaging, may in the near future provide a reliable and objective test to make this determination.

[medicography]

Only a small fraction of mental disorders can be characterized as “like another person inside"

 

I think this is known as MPD=MUltiple Personality Disorder.

 

I heard that people who suffer from it, they dont know about what they are doing., like someone else is controlling that person and the irony is that that person is himself responsible for the acts.

 

There is a book famous on it, TELL ME YOUR DREAMS, by Sidney Sheldon. All on personality disorder, worth readin

[InfiniteNow]

One of the main problem that court psychologists must address is determining if a person is legally not responsible for their actions by reason of insanity, or pretending insanity to escape punishment.

All of CraigD's points are valid... as if that were ever in question. :lol:

 

 

The problem I see also is on actually defining insanity. It's not like you go through some checklist, and if you score 8 out of 10 you're insane, but if you score 7 out of 10 you are not. Often, insanity is a cue to our lack of understanding, not the mind of the individual in question, and is by it's very nature subjective and difficult to quantify.

 

Some interesting and fresh thoughts HB. I am curious what others think. :cup:

[CraigD]

The problem I see also is on actually defining insanity. It's not like you go through some checklist, and if you score 8 out of 10 you're insane, but if you score 7 out of 10 you are not. Often, insanity is a cue to our lack of understanding, not the mind of the individual in question, and is by it's very nature subjective and difficult to quantify.

Another complicating aspect of innocence-by-reason-of-insanity law is that, while in principle the determination of a persons capacity to be legally responsible for a crime should be independent of the crime, courts being collections of human beings with ordinary human emotions, this appears to rarely be the case. Hypothetically, a person who vandalizes McDonalds restaurants under the delusional conviction that they’re part of a conspiracy to rule the world is more likely to be deemed not responsible than a person who kills McDonald employees under the same delusion.

 

Non-hypothetically, there’s the case of Andrea Yates, who, in 2001, methodically drown her 5 young children. Although all parties held that she was severely psychotic, prosecutors nonetheless sought to have her executed, and a jury sentenced her to life imprisonment in a non-psychiatric prison. After a series or appeals, Yates’s conviction was overturned 7/26/2006. She was subsequently committed by a judge to a mental hospital.

[InfiniteNow]

...and a jury sentenced her to life imprisonment in a non-psychiatric prison. After a series or appeals, Yates’s conviction was overturned 7/26/2006. She was subsequently committed by a judge to a mental hospital.

Wow... from Cool Hand Luke to One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. I'm not so sure that was in her best interests. :lol: