Oh it definitely can, but when it comes to mental illnesses you have to be careful or major law suits can happen. There usually has to be multiple cases before that label is used, or they can sue and say wrongfully charged and labeled due to a mental illness that he/she has no control over other than to monitor and medicate the illness.
Lol. I try. But if he was deemed insane, wouldn't he have a shorter sentence and be put in some rehab center? It's like he wanted to go to prison. And why isn't killing someone enough to deem you mentally unstable? Sorry I'm asking so many questions. I really don't get it.
His sentence could have been shorter, however having the label he would have to go through so much more. He would need a psychologist meeting probably around 3 times a week, and would be in a mental rehab for a long. While going sane, he has a good amount of sentence but when released he wouldn't have to go through all that. It depends on the murder, and what the "reasoning" was behind it. While we all think, he killed someone there is no good reason, it still could of been a defense and not just random so many factors involved.
It really falls into that people are way too quick to judge others, instead of looking at situations from every point of view and with an open mind.
I will reread this tomorrow afternoon and respond to it. So I can think about it. And stuff. And I'll post then, too. Want other opinions. Nite though.
this is my first time replaying to something in the forums but to be completely honest ive been borderline schizophrenic since i was 9 and im fine... i hear the voices and everything and saw a psychologist but all the voices did were make fun of me and stuff not like telling me to kill people. so it depends on how severe the case is i guess. hope this helped
There was a case when a kid was tortured and bullied by kids older than him, severely. Like beaten up 3-4 times daily, called every insult and cuss word there is, etc. after 5 years he stabbed one of the kids in the neck and he died. Apparently he'd failed suicide twice. So... Still murder, but I might not label him as mentally unstable because of the murder. :/ but wait, I would. 0.0 because you've gota be screwed up after going through all of that. So wait, what was my point? azarah I blame you!
Oh wait my point was that I wouldn't label him unstable because of the murder... Like say there's a serial killer, and he threatens to kill your whole family, and you see him on the street, and wreck his ass. I wouldn't call you crazy for defending your family.
I believe that the way it works is that covering up the crime, or fleeing from the scene establishes you as sane as you knew right from wrong and attempted to hide what you had done. Having schizophrenia doesn't automatically make you insane, psychologists also argue that the illness itself is too broadly labelled and covers a multitude of illnesses. For example: paranoid schizophrenics are very different to catatonic schizophrenics who sit motionless and frozen. Not all schizophrenics hear voices or have hallucinations. In a court setting there have been some bizarre (in my opinion) rulings. How on earth was Jeffrey dahmer judged sane? A corpse on the bed and he lets the police in to look round?!?? Sometimes I think the judgement is made to satisfy the public/victim's family need for punishment irrespective of the mental state. It's known as the 'mad or bad' debate if you want to look into it further
The other issue of course is as mentioned, where a sentence is served. An insane person will be in a mental hospital, a sane one will be in a prison. The prison is seen as a punishment. Also look up the mcnaghten rules, these were established in the UK as the basis for insanity defences in courts.