can be distinguished from legal insanity and rebutting expert
If the defendant chooses to raise legal insanity or mens rea
freely admissible, that a cognitive standard for legal insanity is
optimum, and that the alternatives to legal insanity are undesirable.
of all such evidence into the issue of legal insanity because so-called
mens rea variant is a claim entirely distinct from legal insanity, even
Before concluding the discussion of legal insanity, it is important
criterion for legal insanity and does no real explanatory work.
determinism have nothing to do with legal insanity or criminal
entirely distinct from the legal insanity issue, even if precisely the
support a finding of legal insanity, but the questions being answered by
The operative Arizona legal insanity test under which Clark was
32) First, the M'Naghten test for legal insanity is antiquated and does not reflect modern understanding of human psychiatry.
The United States adopted the M'Naghten insanity test in all but two states and used this as the primary test for legal insanity until 1954.
The GMI verdict allows a judge or jury to find a defendant guilty but mentally ill if they find that the defendant was guilty of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant did not meet the test for legal insanity (which was based upon the M'Naghten rule in Michigan), and that the defendant was mentally ill at the time the offense was committed.