Insanity defense

[fredtoast]

If someone chops off his child's head and claims it was because God told him to should he be able to use a defense based on diminished capacity ( insanity).

I say "no" because all religious beliefs have no basis in reality or logic.  Therefore the argument would be that everyone who believes in God is insane.  And almost all religions have dogma that justifies killing in the name of their beliefs.

[GMDino]

(09-28-2020, 02:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If someone chops off his child's head and claims it was because God told him to should he be able a defense based on diminished insanity.

I say "no" because all religious beliefs have no basis in reality or logic.  Therefore the argument would be that everyone who believes in God is insane.  And almost all religions have dogma that justifies killing in the name of their beliefs.

Doesn't it come down to if you can prove that the suspect REALLY BELIEVES what they say?

Just finished a book on serial killers and most *try* the insanity defense but not all get away with it because their prior actions show otherwise.

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2020, 02:14 PM)GMDino Wrote: Doesn't it come down to if you can prove that the suspect REALLY BELIEVES what they say?

Just finished a book on serial killers and most *try* the insanity defense but not all get away with it because their prior actions show otherwise.

In Tennessee you basically have to show that the person did not know the difference between right and wrong or else they were acting on an "irresistible impulse".

In sanity defense cases make the news, but they usually are not successful.  For example, if a person tries to hide the crime or flee from authorities that generally proves that he knew what he was doing was wrong.  Also juries just usually do not believe them no matter how crazy they act after arrest unless there was a proven history of the person acting insane before the killing.

[Dill]

(09-28-2020, 02:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If someone chops off his child's head and claims it was because God told him to should he be able to use a defense based on diminished capacity ( insanity).

I say "no" because all religious beliefs have no basis in reality or logic.  Therefore the argument would be that everyone who believes in God is insane.  And almost all religions have dogma that justifies killing in the name of their beliefs.

Schizophrenia would likely be the defense here. Not "religion."

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2020, 03:34 PM)Dill Wrote: Schizophrenia would likely be the defense here. Not "religion."

Does believing in messages from God make someone schizophrenic?

[Dill]

(09-28-2020, 03:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Does believing in messages from God make someone schizophrenic?

If they are voices inside his head, telling him to kill a family member for God, most likely yes.

That is not the same as someone killing gays because he read God says so in the Bible and his pastor confirmed it.

https://ppccparley.com/americas-role-in-the-criminalization-of-homosexuality-in-uganda-by-emmaline-winter/

[*michaelsean*]

(09-28-2020, 02:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If someone chops off his child's head and claims it was because God told him to should he be able to use a defense based on diminished capacity ( insanity).

I say "no" because all religious beliefs have no basis in reality or logic.  Therefore the argument would be that everyone who believes in God is insane.  And almost all religions have dogma that justifies killing in the name of their beliefs.

I’m saying you have to absolutely not know the difference between right and wrong in our laws. God may have told them to, but they still know it’s wrong in our conventional morality. Any attempt to hide the crime then no.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

Actually setting out what constitutes and "insanity defense" would be helpful here.

Essentially the insanity defense states you were not in your right mind at the time of the offense or that you were unable to distinguish between right or wrong at the time.  Mens rea, or the intent to act wrong (criminally) is a key component of our criminal justice system.  Fred is essentially asserting that religious belief is a form of mental illness, which really wouldn't inherently negate the defense, although it would open up the use of this defense by any religious person.

However, you can still know an action is wrong even if you believe God told you to do it.  Honestly, this thread really comes off as a thin veneer coated over an excuse to bash religious people. 

[*PhilHos*]

(09-28-2020, 04:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Actually setting out what constitutes and "insanity defense" would be helpful here.

Essentially the insanity defense states you were not in your right mind at the time of the offense or that you were unable to distinguish between right or wrong at the time.  Mens rea, or the intent to act wrong (criminally) is a key component of our criminal justice system.  Fred is essentially asserting that religious belief is a form of mental illness, which really wouldn't inherently negate the defense, although it would open up the use of this defense by any religious person.

However, you can still know an action is wrong even if you believe God told you to do it.  Honestly, this thread really comes off as a thin veneer coated over an excuse to bash religious people. 

It's not very thin at all. It's clearly nothing but an excuse to bash religion and religious people.

[BigPapaKain]

There's a reason the insanity plea works less than 1% of thr time.

[*bfine32*]

Luckily when it comes to the true judgement day I won't need a defense.

[Dill]

(09-28-2020, 04:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: However, you can still know an action is wrong even if you believe God told you to do it.  Honestly, this thread really comes off as a thin veneer coated over an excuse to bash religious people. 

You could know a command from God conflicted with some federal or state law--created by humans.

Doubtful if any person who believes in God (the God of Abraham, at least) could think or "know" God told them to commit a wrong action. "Right" is action in accordance with this will, and "wrong" action against it.

More likely the offender would assume the human laws were wrong. 

I'm not a believer, but if God told me "Jump," I wouldn't ask "how high?"  I'd be in the air already.

[*PhilHos*]

(09-28-2020, 06:01 PM)Dill Wrote: You could know a command from God conflicted with some federal or state law--created by humans.

Doubtful if any person who believes in God (the God of Abraham, at least) could think or "know" God told them to commit a wrong action. "Right" is action in accordance with this will, and "wrong" action against it.

More likely the offender would assume the human laws were wrong. 

I'm not a believer, but if God told me "Jump," I wouldn't ask "how high?"  I'd be in the air already.

Any person who believes in God should also know that God would not tell them to commit an action that would break HIS laws, too. You know, something like murdering someone else, for example.

But, also, if God asks you to break human law, He'd expect you to accept the consequences, as well.

[*Nately120*]

Can we specify which god is telling me to kill someone?

[*PhilHos*]

(09-28-2020, 06:11 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Can we specify which god is telling me to kill someone?

Christian God of course. No one thinks the Muslim God tells his followers to kill people. 

[*Nately120*]

(09-28-2020, 06:24 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Christian God of course. No one thinks the Muslim God tells his followers to kill people. 

Christian god as in Jesus himself or old testament "I'm very similar to Zeus" god?  I mean, depending on how much a person believes the Bible is 100% from god's own mouth if you don't do what he says he can and will straight up murder you.

[Dill]

(09-28-2020, 06:05 PM)PhilHos Wrote:
Any person who believes in God should also know that God would not tell them to commit an action that would break HIS laws, too. You know, something like murdering someone else, for example.

But, also, if God asks you to break human law, He'd expect you to accept the consequences, as well.

I don't know if God would expect me to "accept the consequences." MLK would. 

If God tells you to do "murder" someone, then it's not murder.

If God told you to break His law, then you are NOT breaking it by obeying Him, because His Word is law.

He decides what is "murder" or not. And if He tells you to kill someone, then it is by definition not murder.

[*PhilHos*]

(09-28-2020, 06:43 PM)Dill Wrote: I don't know if God would expect me to "accept the consequences." MLK would. 

Well of course, you don't know! YOu already admitted to not knowing God. Trust me. He would. 

(09-28-2020, 06:43 PM)Dill Wrote: If God tells you to do "murder" someone, then it's not murder.

Yes, it is. 

(09-28-2020, 06:43 PM)Dill Wrote: If God told you to break His law, then you are NOT breaking it by obeying Him, because His Word is law.

Which only reinforces the point that God would not ask someone to break His law. 

(09-28-2020, 06:43 PM)Dill Wrote: He decides what is "murder" or not. And if He tells you to kill someone, then it is by definition not murder.

Only if He decides to completely overturn everything He's ever said about it prior to telling you to do it. I mean, sure, God could change His mind and decide to redefine what a 'murder' is but God's message has been pretty consistent over the last few tens of thousands of years, so I highly doubt He'd change His mind NOW.

[*Nately120*]

Wait, so is the notion here that if a voice tells you to kill you can conclude that it is not god speaking to you because he'd never ask you to do that?

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2020, 04:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:   Honestly, this thread really comes off as a thin veneer coated over an excuse to bash religious people. 

(09-28-2020, 05:42 PM)PhilHos Wrote: It's not very thin at all. It's clearly nothing but an excuse to bash religion and religious people.

If you guys weren't so consume with attacking me you would see that denying the insanity defense to people acting under the direction of God is actuallu SUPPORTING religious belief.  If you allow them to use the insanity defense then you are saying that all religious people are insane.

This is a legitimate debate in legal circle and I brought it up because I recently finished reading "Under the Banner of God" which directly addresses this issue in the trials of Ron and Dan Lafferty, two Mormons who brutally murdered their sister-in-law and her infant daughter because God told them to.  Ron refused to let his lawyers even address the insanity defense.  Dan's lawyers tried and lost.

But now that you guys are finnish taking shots at me do either of you care to give your opinion on the original question?