Mental Disorders Within the Criminal Justice System - Coursework Example

Introduction Mental disorders within the criminal justice system have undergone numerous changes over the past few years. These began as far back as1893 and continued on until 1999. The essay shall look into the details surrounding some of these legislative changes and how they have been applied within the criminal justice system to either impede justice or to further the administration of justice within the system. Effect of the mental disorders within the criminal justice system During the year 1999, the UK parliament passed the Criminal cases review Insanity Act in which the Court of Appeal has been granted the powers to be able to carry out a hearing and dismissals based on the guilty but insane Act whose reference dates back to the Criminal cases Review Commission. It should be noted that the latter law was abolished during the nineteen sixties; however some individuals may still be liable to such conditions. (UK government, 2008) In the guilty bust insane verdict provided for in the 1883 Lunatics Act, the law states that when a certain individual was accused of a crime and that sufficient evidence is given in order to support those accusations as to make that respective individual guilty, then that person may be found guilty but insane of it was also proven that that respective individual was insane. The special verdict can be passed even when the person under consideration seems to be in good mental health at the time of the trial but it was affirmed that during the process of committing the criminal Act, this was not the case. (The BBC, 1999) Back in the year 1907, The House of Lords held that there should be no appeal against such cases that an accused had in fact committed the act owing to the fact that the suspect does not posses a guilty mind to carry out that Act. The latter decision was validated during Felstead [1914] AC 534. It should be noted that this law was applicable throughout much of this century until the nineteen sixties. At that time, Northern Ireland passed a law of not guilty on the basis of insanity. This was known as the Mental Health Act. Additionally at that time, the Insanity Act of 1964 was passed in England and Wales where a guilty but inane verdict was changed to one known as the guilty by reason of insanity. In the Criminal Appeal Act of England and Wales (1968) it was put forward that there sections 12 and 14 allowed for appeals. On the other hand, there were of appeals against the guilty but insane verdict within Northern Ireland. (Giddens, 1998) In the Criminal Cases Review Commission, there was a need to look into some of the issues to be addressed within the Act. Consequently, in the year 1999, it was decided that the latter Commission has the powers to be able to refer a verdict of guilty or not guilty. Besides that, the Court of Appeal has also been given the power to determine whether a reference made by the Commission is worth hearing and disposing. All in all, the Act puts out the following matters “The Court of Appeal shall either make an order that the appellant shall be admitted to hospital, or, where they have the power to do so, a guardianship order, supervision and treatment order, or an order for the appellants absolute discharge. Because there could not have been such findings in cases before the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead Act) 1991, subsection 2(2)(b) has the effect of requiring the Court in these cases to consider not what findings there should have been, but simply what the facts of the case are.” (UK government, 2008) Cases affected by the law The insanity law passed in 1999 allowed for guilty but insane appeal cases. This passing was driven by a case of a man who had been accused of murder that he had been committed as far back as fifty years ago. The latter individual was trying to prove his innocence by reason of insanity. The latter debate necessitated the introduction of this law into the parliament after supporters of Iain Gordon claimed that this individual had been one of the longest standing recipients of injustice within the United Kingdom. (Fraser, 1997) This eventually necessitated an examination of fresh evidence following a murder committed in the year 1953. At that time, this individual had killed his daughter through multiple stabs (reports claim that they were around thirty seven of them). The murder was tried and Gordon convicted of being guilty but insane. After the latter trial, the accused was sentenced to time in a mental institution known as Holywell Mental Institution. Seven years after the sentence, the latter accused was released from prison and it was found that he had to change his name or either refused to talk about the latter case. Consequently, Gordon’s supporters claimed that he had to resort to such measures irrespective of the fact that most of his medical records were impeccable. There was a team that had been appointed to take part in this manner case and it comprised of a campaign team, a legal representative, an assistant Metropolitan Police Commissioner and the accused legal representative. This team was then responsible or submission of certain dossiers to the legal team. (Kelly, 2000) It should be noted that the latter team worked on some of pieces of evidence that were deigned on proving that there should be a referral to the Court of Appeal on the matter. On top o this, they wanted a reversal of the conviction. After examination to the evidence before them and after looking at the crime scene, it was found that Gordon did not possess a light to appeal. The latter decision as founded upon a technical issue i.e. pen could not be bale to reverse any guilty but insane rule. The lawyers representing this individual filed argued for a new change in legislation that would eliminate such an obstacle. These actions were therefore responsible for introducing the Insanity Bill into the House of Commons where the debate began. When Gordon was asked about the law, he asserted that the passage of the law was due for a very long time. He claimed that it is only in very few developed countries where people lack the ability to appeal. Consequently, the law was preventing him form clearing his name. Form the latter case, it can be said that the law was an impediment to the administration of justice before the year 1999, however, shortly after, it was possible to appeal a certain case that had passed a guilty by reason of insanity ruling. (Farber & Sherry, 2003) Mental disorders also affect the decisions made in the criminal justice system by either determining whether a certain individual is either guilty or not guilty even after admitting to have committed a crime. A case in point was that of an Austrain national Josef Fritzl who was seventy three years old. The latter individual; had been accused of continually raping his daughter and locking her up in a dungeon. In a surprising turn of events, he admitted to having committed the crimes and even gave very vivid details of the process. (Bloxham, 2008) He attributed his criminal mind of the Nazi ideologies that he had been exposed. On top of that, he wanted to inhibit his daughters form engaging in horrible habits such as drinking and smoking too. He backed this up with the fantasies that he had about his mother. Most of the latter issues were carried forward when the accused had his first child known as Elisableth. Fritzl wanted to ensure that there was adequate control within his household through an obsessive manner. In this regard, he tricked his daughter to help him carry a heavy door into a hidden chamber within their house. Upon assisting her dad, Elisabeth found that she had been locked up and could not get out. Firtzl asserts that he wanted to create a new family in which he could shield the members away from the rest of the world and provide them with all the information or materials that they needed. He says that he would continually rape his daughter because he wanted to taste the forbidden fruit and also because there was a need to establish a new family that was well controlled by this individual. When his daughter became pregnant with her first child, he gave her medical books so as to ensure that she knew what to do when it was time to have her baby. The same thing applied to other children that his daughter had with her. The accused was trying to fulfil a fantasy in which he could exert firm control and authority to his children without nay control. He was bale o do this for a period of eighteen years after which he was discovered and sentenced. (Stratton, 2008) When asked to explain why he had committed the acts that he had, he claimed that eth Nazi background had messed up his mind. In other words, he claimed that the principles holding this organisation in place were the same ones that affected him. Nazis believed in subduing resistance by controlling and instilling authority between these groups. When the accused lawyer was asked about hi strategy in court, he claimed that he would use the issue of mental disorders to defend his clients. In the discussion, the latter lawyer asserted that his client belonged to a psychiatric institution more than a prison. In this regard, he claimed that his client had a diminished mental capacity and his sense of responsibility had therefore gone down. In order for Mr. Fritzl to be judged as a mentally ill patient, then there was need for the court to order psychiatric evaluation on this individual. However, the latter lawyer had the option of resorting to another psychiatric report if he felt that the one ordered by the court did not reveal the true mental state of his client. It should be noted that these assertions were particularly disturbing owing to the fact that some fresh accusations had been made against this respective client against a different victim i.e. a nurse. (Bloxham, 2008) In the latter case critics have affirmed that pleading for mental insanity is sometimes an obstruction of justice. This is largely because it can be argued that the latter issue has impaired the administration of justice among these individuals. The lives that had been affected by the latter accused were very grave and denying his daughter justice through insanity could bring a series impairment in the criminal justice system within the UK. In 2004, the R v Gurbinder Samra case also reflected how the issue of mental disorders can come in the way of administration of justice within the system. The latter case had been presided over by Lord Justice Kennedy after the accusation that Samra had been involved in the killing of his wife in the year 1994. (Moles & Sangha, 2004) A slight background into the story reveals the fact that Samra was brought up by a strict and traditional Indian family. He moved to England for most of his life and found that he conflicted with beliefs from these two geographical areas. After intense convincing from his parents, he yielded to their demands and opted to marry a woman of his parent’s choice. His wife bore him a son but soon went back to her parents after increased tension between these respective parties. In line with their Indian roots, their parents intervened in the situation and his wife returned shortly after. (Thompson, 2002) It seems as though Samra was undergoing a lot of mental trauma all because he had just lost the job that he had held for quite some time. In lien with this, his wife was seen dressed in nothing but a towel and running down the street screaming at her husband. At that time, Samra chased her and after catching up, held her and pulled her hair. When his mother appeared with a weapon that was ceremonial in nature to try and minimise Samra’s temper, the opposite effect as instead achieved. At this point, Samra grabbed the weapon held by the latter individual and quickly stabbed his wife severely. She sustained fatal wounds that eventually lead to her death. There were certain revelations that reflected the mental state of the latter individual. According it him, all these actions were committed when he was in another mental state. He claimed that he could not recollect a single happening at that fateful night and that he did not know how his wife had died. However, critics to the latter matter asserted that the individual could recall some of the goings on that went on when he was at a police station. Besides that, they also claim that the accused was very angry at his wife prior to her death as revealed by Samra himself. He claimed that there were fears that his wife was going to leave him again. (Moles & Sangha, 2004) The latter individual was convicted and found guilty but insane. However, after the discovery of fresh evidence, it was found that the issue of diminished responsibility was under question and that there was a need to re-examine this evidence so as to protect the interests of the accused party. Conclusion In the year 1893, it had been passed that if it had been proved that person was in an unstable mental state at the time of committing the criminal act, then that person could be pronounced guilty but insane. After excessive lobbying and debates on this issue, it had been asserted that there was no need for appealing such convictions. However, in 1999, such appeals were overturned thus prompting the administration of justice for certain person who were merely facing legal obstacles. It can therefore be asserted that this latter Act has promoted administration of justice because it has eliminated a legal hurdle. On the other hand, it may be treated as an impediment within the criminal justice system because if utilised by certain individuals who may lack sufficient evidence to prove that they were mentally ill, then chances are that the sentence can lead to greater accusations. References Moles, R. & Sangha, B. (2004): Samra v The Queen Court of Appeal, retrieved from http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2004/1797.html accessed on 21 Jan 2008 UK government (2008): Explanatory Notes to Criminal cases Review; Crown Publishers The BBC (1999): UK Commons passes insanity law, retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/ Stratton, A. (2008): Fritzl to plead insanity says lawyer, The Guardian, 4th May Bloxham, A. (2008): Josef Fritzl expected to plead insanity, The telegraph, 21st July Fraser, N (1997): Justice Interruptus: Reflections on the post-socialist condition; London Routledge Giddens, A (1998): The Third Way: Towards the politics of social renewal Cambridge: Polity Press Kelly, D (2000): Pregnant with Meaning NY and London: Peter Lang Thompson, M. (2002): Life and Action: Elementary Structures of Practice and Practical Thought; Routledge Daniel A. Farber & Suzanna Sherry (2003): Judgment Calls: Principle and Politics in Constitutional Law Read More