An insider's account of America's ineffectual approach to some of the hardest defense and intelligence issues in the three decades since the Cold War ended. Insanity can be defined as doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result. As a nation, America has cycled through the same defense and intelligence issues since the end of the Cold War. In Insanity Defense, Congresswoman Jane Harman chronicles how four administrations have failed to confront some of the toughest national security policy issues and suggests achievable fixes that can move us toward a safer future. The reasons for these inadequacies are varied and complex, in some cases going back generations. American leaders didn’t realize soon enough that the institutions and habits formed during the Cold War were no longer effective in an increasingly multi-power world transformed by digital technology and riven by ethno-sectarian conflict. Nations freed from the fear of the Soviets no longer deferred to America as before. Yet the United States settled into a comfortable, at times arrogant, position as the lone superpower. At the same time our governing institutions, which had stayed resilient, however imperfectly, through multiple crises, began their own unraveling. Congresswoman Harman was there—as witness, legislator, exhorter, enabler, dissident and, eventually, outside advisor and commentator. Insanity Defense is an insider’s account of decades of American national security—of its failures and omissions—and a roadmap to making significant progress on solving these perennially difficult issues.

The insanity defense has become the most passionately debated issue in criminal law, a debate marked by slogans and stereotypes. Mr. Goldstein offers a reasoned study of that debate and the current rules behind the law, as well as a careful examination of what might be expected from any new rules now proposed.

Thinking About the Insanity Defense answers ninety-seven frequently asked questions and presents sixteen case examples in easily understood language. This volume provides a clear and compelling introduction to one of the most important topics in the relation between psychology and law. Compiled by members of a Harvard seminar, it directs attention to the issues most often raised by the general public and by students of social science and criminal justice. The frequently asked questions about the insanity defense address: its history and psychological aspects; the effects of different standards for determining insanity; the arguments for its retention, abolition, and revision; media and other responses to it; controversies around pre- and post-conviction commitment; and the roles of psychologists, psychiatrists, and lawyers. The case examples illustrate a variety of outcomes and include individuals who were: found not guilty by reason of insanity; found guilty even though mentally ill; and not charged because of mental illness. The extensive bibliography directs students and citizens interested in psychology, law, and criminal justice to further cases and analyses. The insanity defense is one of the most significant topics in psychoforensics. This brief and readable book is the first place to look for what most people want to know about the insanity defense.

Lawrie Reznek addresses these questions and more in his controversial investigation of the insanity defense in Evil or Ill? Drawing from countless intriguing case examples, he aims to understand the concept of an excuse, and explains why the law excuses certain actions and not others. In his easily accessible and elegant style, he explains that in law, there exists two excuses derived from Aristotle: the excuses of ignorance and compulsion. Reznek, however proposes a third excuse - the excuse of character change. In introducing this third excuse, Reznek raises a controversial possibility - the abolition of the insanity defence.

"Please do not supply a summary with this CIP"--

How often is the defense of insanity or temporary insanity for accused criminals valid—or is it ever legitimate? This unique work presents multidisciplinary viewpoints that explain, support, and critique the insanity defense as it stands. What is the role of "the insanity defense" as a legal excuse? How does U.S. law handle criminal trials where the defendant pleads insanity, and how does our legal system's treatment differ from those of other countries or cultures? How are insanity defenses used, and how successful are these defenses for the accused? What are the costs of incarceration versus psychiatric treatment and confinement? This book presents a range of expert viewpoints on the insanity defense, exposing common myths; investigating its effectiveness and place in our legal system through history, case studies, and comparative analysis; and supplying perspectives from the disciplines of psychology, psychiatry, sociology, and neuroscience. The content also addresses the ramifications of declaring citizens insane or incapacitated and examines trials that involved pleas of insanity and temporary insanity.

Distributive principles of criminal law -- Habitual offender statutes -- Death penalty -- Legality requirement -- Provocation/extreme emotional disturbance -- Felony murder -- Causation -- Transferred intent -- Consent to injury -- Mental illness negating an offense element (MINOE) -- Attempt -- Complicity -- Complicity liability of co-conspirators -- Lesser evils/necessity defense -- Self-defense -- Law enforcement authority -- Insanity defense -- Immaturity defense -- Statute of limitations -- Exclusionary rule -- Entrapment defense -- Criminalizing risk creation -- Statutory rape -- Domestic violence, spousal rape exemption -- Stalking and harassment -- Child neglect -- Deceptive business practices -- Extortion -- Adultery -- Criminal obscenity -- Child pornography -- Drug offenses -- Firearms possession offenses -- Antitrust predatory pricing -- Organized crime -- Fixing sporting events -- Extradition -- Jurisdiction

Two experts on law and psychiatry examine the insanity defense and the role of the psychiatrist in the court- room, reviewing seven cases of murder and attempted mur- der, and offer recommedations for change.