책임능력에 대한 판단과 정신감정절차

Abstract

The criminal law generally assumed that most people have common mental and psychological capabilities sufficient to hold them responsible for the crimes they commit. But the criminal law provides limited excruse for a defendant to avoid or lessen his responsibility by indicating that one or more of his important human capacities impaired when he committed the criminal act. Legal insanity is an excuse that also permits inquiry into a defendant's capacity to know the law or to exercise free will. The elements of insanity defense must produce that the accused have suffered a defect of reason, from a disease of mind; and that the consequently at the time of the act he did not know that the act was wrong. There are nor a clear and comprehensive determination of what type of mental disease or defect. The criminal responsibility rule to be found in the case law requires a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity if it is found that the defendant had a mental disease which kept him from controlling his conduct. For various reasons, the insanity defense is raised in only a very small percentage of criminal cases. The defense of insanity is litigated at the criminal trial. The relavant time frame for the inquiry is the defendant's mental status at the time of the alleged offense. Thus, the assessment is retrospective. Under the trial procedure, the court designates a specific psychiatrist who will examine the defendant. The report of expert examination is likely to have a very significant impact upon the outcome of the case. Now the prosecution would be confronted with the burden of establishing the defendant's sanity in every criminal case. In preparing for the trial a impartial mental health expert should be evaluate the defendant prior to the trial. Based on a wide variety of information, such as the defendant's mental health history, his account of the crime, the facts and circumstances surrounding the crime, and psychological and medical testing, these experts will form an opinion as to the defendant's mental status at the time of the crime and whether it satisfies the elements of the insanity test used in their jurisdiction.