YEAR	DECEPTION	AUTHOR	SOURCE	SELECTION	ABSTRACT
2009	The insanity defense in military court	Elin Berg MD, PhD	Psychiatry CD	10558	This presentation addresses the particulars of the insanity defense in military law as compared to civilian federal and state law. Since 2004 the legal approach to the insanity defense in military court may actually more closely resemble that of certain state jurisdictions. Forensic psychiatric experts as always need to be familiar with the statutes pertinent to jurisdictions in which they serve as experts. This presentation will review pertinent statutes and how they impact the role of the expert in terms of examining the defendant so that the questions raised by the court can be properly an-swered. The various steps involved in the evaluation as the defendant appears before the sanity board will be reviewed and case examples given. The dilemma of the expert in the role of helping the court understand the legal ramifications of the psychiatric findings and how they might influence cognition and behavior albeit without answering the ultimate question is discussed. Illustrative case examples will be given. Elin Berg, M.D., Ph.D. is in private practice in Co-lumbia, South Carolina. Edward Berg II, Esq. is Chief of Criminal Law with the Judge Advocacy General at Fort Ben-ning, Columbus, Georgia. He served four years on active duty with the Signal Corps and was on a one year tour of duty to Iraq with the 3rd Infantry Division in 2006.
2008	Insanity is smashing up against my soul: Qanetti v. Quarterman and questions that won t go away	Michael Perlin, J.D.	psychiatry CD	10631	In Panetti v. Quarterman, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded upon and clarified its earlier decision in Ford v. Wainwright, barring the execution of a person with mental disabilities who does not have a "rational understanding" of the reasons he is to be executed. The Panetti decision, however, has a second holding that may be equally important: that the failure to provide a defendant an adequate opportunity to submit expert evidence in response to the report filed by the court-appointed experts thus deprived him of his "constitutionally adequate opportunity to be heard." Both holdings leave open questions that will likely be explored in subsequent cases. The Court chose not to address the question that many observers had thought was at the core of the case: whether a defendant can be medicated so as to make him competent to be executed. In this presentation, the author will discuss Panetti, and offer some possible answers to the unanswered questions.--Michael Perlin is Professor of Law at New York Law School, where he is the Director of the Online Mental Disability Law Program. He is the former director of the Division of Mental Health Advocacy in the NJ Department of the Public Advocate.
2005	Filicide and insanity defense: legal authoritarianism and empathy as predictors of guilt	Dawn Hurst MA, Linda Foley PhD	psychology journal	9006	Maternal filicide, though relatively rare, has progressively become more predominant in mainstream multimedia. Filicide is loosely defined as the killing of a son or daughter by a parent or step parent. For purposes of this article, "filicide" will encompass neonaticide (i.e., killing a child within the first 24 hours of life), infanticide (i.e., killing a child within more than 24 hours to one year of life), and filicide (i.e., killing a child after the first year of life). Recent highly publicized cases have prompted a growing interest by clinicians, researchers, and law enforcement agencies. The reason for killing one s child is not evident; however, a considerable amount of literature exists that suggests mental illness is a contributing factor. The current case involves a woman who kills her two children after being taken off depression medication. She pleads Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (NGRI). Participants (N = 144) completed the Legal Attitudes Questionnaire Revised (LAQR) and the Perspective-Taking (PT) Subscale of the Empathy Scale. A low score on the LAQR predicted decisions of NGRI, not guilty of first-degree murder, and not deserving of the death penalty. A high score on the PT Subscale predicted less likelihood of guilty first-degree murder decisions. Participants attitudes predicted decisions about degree of defendant culpability and severity of punishment.
2004	The insanity defense: a case study	Ralph Slovenko JD, PhD	psychiatry tapes	3106	This presentation covers various aspects of the insanity defense arising out of a case of matricide. A professor of law discusses the impact of intoxication on criminal responsibility, conditions for culpability, expert testimony, the meaning of mental disorder, and disposition of the NGRI acquittee.
2004	A successful insanity defense in a double parricide case	Elliot Atkins, Ed.D.	psychology tape	3071	A Harvard-trained medical doctor was charged with two counts of first degree murder in response to her taking the life of her parents. The author, a forensic psychologist, worked in collaboration with a forensic psychiatrist in facilitating the preparation of a not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) defense. The audience will be taken through the exhaustive evaluative and investigative process and the machinations of the legal system will be revealed as this tragic and remarkable case proceeds.
2003	Doctors in trouble with ketamine-murder, rape, malpractice and insanity-4 cases and review of ketamine and the expert witness	Karl L.R. Jansen, MD, PhD, MRCPsych	psychiatry tapes	3022	Ketamine is a dissociative anesthetic with hallucinogenic effects. The presenter will consider the separate cases of four doctors facing charges resulting from their use of ketamine. Attendees will learn: the key facts concerning the use, users and consequences of ketamine of interest to forensic psychiatrists; the likely effects of ketamine on memory and other aspects of the mental state in the more frequently encountered circumstances; forming an opinion in malpractice suits involving the use of ketamine as a therapeutic agent.
2002	Opinions on insanity according to federal law, rule 17 and the M'Naghten standard	Selma De Jesus-Zayas PhD	psychiatry journal	7079	Historically the legal definition of insanity has undergone multiple revisions. Presently, the two most prevalent views pertaining to insanity are the Federal Law, Rule 17 and the M Naghten standard. The Federal Law, Rule 17 is the definition for insanity used in federal courts, while most states employ the M Naghten standard. The present study examined whether mental health professionals and criminal attorneys, practicing at the federal and state level, perceive the definitions of insanity as being different and if they render different interpretations to both definitions of insanity.
2002	Abraham and Mary Lincoln-insanity in and out of the courtroom	Allen Spiegel PhD	psychiatry journal	771	As a lawyer, Abraham Lincoln tried a few cases in which an insanity plea was utilized. Individually, both Lincolns suffered from emotional difficulties associated with depression and eccentric behavior. Mary s son, Robert, even initiated and participated in a trial that declared his mother insane. She spent some time in a "genteel" facility for the mentally ill. A second trial found her recovered and released her. Lincoln s law firm represented a man s son claiming that a land deal should be set aside because his father was insane when he made the deal. Both Lincolns, individually and professionally, experienced travails linked to the issue of insanity.
2001	Opinions on insanity according to federal law, rule 17 and the M'Naghten Standard	Selma De Jesus-Zayas PhD	psychology journal	8188	no abstract
2000	The meaning of mental illness in an insanity defense	Ralph Slovenko JD, PhD	psychiatry tapes	11011	This presentation will discuss some of the nuances of mental disease or defect as required for the insanity defense in criminal law. It reports a variety of interpretations by courts and commentators regarding the meaning of these phrases, and it reports attempts by legislatures to narrow the range of applicable conditions by excluding various mental or emotional states. Attendees will be informed of the scope of "mental illness" in the test of criminal responsibility.
2000	Insanity defense in Polk County, Iowa	James Boudouris PhD	psychology journal	765	This article examines potential jurors' attitudes toward the insanity defense, mental illness and related issues. Questionnaires were administered to 343 persons in the jury pool of Polk County, Iowa in 1988. The responses were cross-tabulated with seven statutory versions of the insanity defense, including the M'Naghten rule, Durham rule, Michigan s Guilty but Mentally Ill statute, the American Law Institute s Model Penal Code, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The implications of these findings for the prosecutor, defense attorney, and mentally ill defendants are discussed.
2000	For the first time in a U.S. court - a murderer s temporary insanity plea	Allen Spiegel PhD	psychiatry journal	982	In 1859, U.S. Congressman Daniel E. Sickles brutally shot and killed Philip Barton Key, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. Sickles accused Key of having an adulterous affair with his wife, Teresa. During the trial, the issue was whether the killing was premeditated, manslaughter or justifiable homicide. Teresa s written confession of adultery was featured on the front page of Harper s Weekly. Defense attorneys argued that Sickles was temporarily insane due to an emotional brainstorm. In addition, the unwritten law permitted a cuckolded husband to avenge the defiling of his marriage bed. There was no expert medical testimony to support the temporary insanity defense. A friend of Sickles, a layman, was the major defense witness testifying about the accused s agitated and distraught state after the murder.
1999	Release of insanity acquittees from custody-insanity release scale	James Hooper MD	psychiatry tapes	1147	The most complex and risky decisions made by psychiatrists revolve around the decision to release Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity patients from custody. Objective assessments that might be used are discussed.
1999	Observations on cognition and insanity	Charles Robinson PhD	psychology journal	761	This article examines psychological, sociopolitical and biological assumptions and meanings associated with three focal concepts utilized in applying the cognitive tests of insanity: Substantial, Capacity, and Appreciation. The relationships of knowing, knowledge, mind, moral reasoning, and goal direction to these three concepts are delineated. Clinical and data based approaches used to examine the relationships among psychiatric conditions, symptoms and relevant sociolegal requirements and the concepts of capacity, substantial, and appreciation are described.
1998	William H. Seward and the insanity plea in 1846	Allen Spiegel PhD	psychiatry journal	769	In 1846, former New York State Governor William H. Seward defended two murderers using the insanity plea in both cases. Seward contended that the accused became insane due to brutal beatings administered while they were in the Auburn penitentiary. William Freeman stabbed four people to death, including a 41-year-old man, his wife, their two-year-old son, and the 70-year-old mother-in-law. In the Freeman trial there were a total of 108 witnesses; 72 for the prosecution and 36 for the defense. Nine physicians testified that the murderer was insane while eight said he was sane. However, only one defense physician was really an expert on insanity. Lay people testified on the prisoner s insanity as well. In general, the evidence was contradicted by all the witnesses from both sides. Emotionally aroused juries convicted both prisoners; one was hanged and the other died in prison awaiting a new trial. Seward s legal defense attracted much attention to the jurisprudence of insanity and to forensic psychiatry in general even though the appellation had yet to be coined.
1998	History of the ' Naghten insanity defense and the use of posttraumatic stress disorder as a basis of insanity	Arthur Garrison	psychology journal	2225	Debate over the existence of an insanity defense and the legal assessment of when a person should not be punished for a criminal act due to mental illness has been an issue in the law for more than 200 years. From 1724 and the development of the "wild beast" test to the M Naghten test of right and wrong to the "irresistible impulse" test to the Durham "products test" the law has struggled with the question of what mental state will release a person from criminal liability. Should the cognitive mind alone govern the issue or should the other aspect of human behavior, including volitional and emotional states, influence the culpability of the offender? The purpose of this article is to review the history of the development of the definition of the insanity defense. The key cases and legal arguments from English and American law will be reviewed to show how the theory as well as the definition of insanity developed. The article will also discuss how posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) can form the basis of an insanity defense and will review federal, military and state cases in which PTSD was used as a basis for a claim of insanity.
1997	Psychologist as an expert witness in determining mental competency and insanity as a defense	Philip Barnard PhD	psychology journal	6021	Psychological experts are frequently asked to render an opinion regarding the mental competence of an individual to stand trial whether or not the insanity defense applies in a particular situation. This article presents an historical perspective on the insanity defense with competency to stand trial as a significant issue. The role of amnesia is also addressed since it was a legal and psychological factor in the case cited.
1996	Abolition of insanity defense in Utah- NGRI homicide case-abridgement of rights	Roger T Sharp JD	psychiatry tapes	1468	The insanity defense, argues this attorney, is as much a part of the concept of "ordered liberty" as any other right. This right has been abridged in Utah, one of several states which, after the Hinckley case, abolished the plea of insanity as a defense to criminal conduct. This trial is discussed.
1996	Abraham Lincoln, an insanity plea and the medical expert	Allen Spiegel PhD	psychiatry journal	654	A Confederate civilian physician shot and killed a white Union officer who was drilling black troops in Norfolk, Virginia. With no question as to guilt, President Abraham Lincoln decided to have a medical expert conduct a sanity examination. Lincoln chose a physician who had a reputation for finding the accused sane and who did so in this case. Documentation indicates that legal and political factors may have influenced Lincoln's choice of physician. As a lawyer, Lincoln had prosecuted and lost a case where the insanity plea was used as a defense. Politically, Lincoln faced serious issues such as the draft riots, the military necessity to recruit freed slaves into the army, the impact of Union black soldiers upon the border states, the morale and discipline of the army and the upcoming presidential election. As the southern physician was hanged, Lincoln s means achieved the desired legal and political ends.
1996	Blaming the blameless-abolition of the insanity defense	Roger Sharp JD Ian Adams JD	psychiatry journal	768	Following the return of a verdict of "not guilty by reason of insanity" in the Hinckley case in 1982, a wave of suspicion with regard to the insanity defense in criminal cases washed across the United States. During the 1980s, a majority of state legislatures and the federal government reconsidered their respective legal defenses of insanity, with eight states and the federal government enacting their revisions of the insanity defense into law. Three state legislatures, including the legislature of the authors home state of Utah, abolished the insanity defense entirely. The authors argue the abolition of the insanity defense implicates the fundamental rights of common law state citizenship and is a violation of a defendant s right to due process under the Federal Constitution, and as to the convicted insane, is cruel and unusual punishment.
1995	Differences in attitudes toward the temporary insanity defense and the insanity defense	Cecelia Updike PhD	psychology journal	772	The insanity defense provokes strong emotions in society. This is also true for the temporary insanity defense. Both types of the defense are greatly misunderstood and misinterpreted by the general public and some legal and mental health professionals. In traditional terms, a crime must consist of three parts including: a guilty mind, an act, and a punishment (1). In other words, the basic common elements are a concurrence between the voluntary act (actus reus) and a culpable intent (mens rea). The act must also cause harm. If an act is missing any one of these parts, then it is not considered a crime and cannot be judged by the same standards as a crime. The insane, whether temporarily or otherwise, are thought to be missing culpable intent when they commit an illegal act. This is the foundation on which the temporary insanity defense and the insanity defense are built.
1994	Abraham Lincoln and chloroform induced insanity	Allen Spiegel PhD	psychiatry journal	760	Prosecutor Abraham Lincoln participated in a murder trial in which the defendant pleaded not guilty by Reason of Insanity. The defense alleged that the defendant was made insane by an overdose of chloroform administered during an earlier surgery.
1994	Proposed changes in the insanity defense in the post-Foucha era	J Arturo Silva MD	psychiatry journal	762	The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled in Foucha v. Louisiana that continuing commitment of dangerous insanity acquittees with antisocial personality disorder, but not an active mental disorder, is not permissible. While this decision has a narrow focus, changes in the insanity defense are suggested to diminish psychiatry's social control role while treating insanity acquittee-patients as well as promote society's continuing acceptability of the insanity defense.
1994	Insanity and medical jurisprudence in 1844- implications for psychiatry today	Emil Pinta MD	psychiatry journal	5212	Psychiatry as a medical specialty emerged at a time when there was a high level of enthusiasm for the treatment of the mentally ill. In 1844, when the organization now known as the American Psychiatric Association was founded, mental illness was generally thought to have a physical basis and to be curable. This article reviews beliefs regarding the nature and treatment of mental illness in the 1840s and examines some of the implications for psychiatry today. Over the years, treatment of the mentally ill has been characterized by periods of optimism alternating with pessimism. Both extremes appear to have done a disservice to the specialty of psychiatry. The jurisprudence of insanity in 1844 is also discussed. This literature is very similar to today's literature on forensic psychiatry.
1994	Jeffrey Dahmer-Was he ill? Was he impaired? Insanity revisited	Fred Berlin MD, PhD	psychiatry journal	8051	no abstract
1993	Problem of treatment-refractory insanity acquittee-patients	J Arturo Silva MD Gregory Leong MD	psychiatry journal	5137	Both therapeutic advances and forces external to medicine have greatly influenced the hospital treatment of psychiatric patients. One group of patients, the treatment-refractory insanity acquittees, has largely escaped these influences. The authors propose a solution to the clinical, ethical, and social concerns raised by long-term hospitalization of these problematic treatment-refractory insanity acquitee-patients.
1993	Politics of the insanity defense	Abraham Halpern MD	psychiatry journal	6054	The verdict of Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity in the case of John W. Hinckley, Jr., resulted in widespread criticism of psychiatry and of psychiatric testimony in criminal trials. The author contends that the post-Hinckley hardline recommendations of the American Psychiatric Association that the exculpatory insanity rule be narrowed and release procedures be tightened were motivated by a desire to improve the image of psychiatry. The opportunity was lost to embark on a comprehensive study of the effects and consequences of the insanity plea. The author believes that by choosing to take the politically expedient route, the APA has done a damaging disservice to society in general and, in the final analysis, to the psychiatric profession.
1992	When the assaultive patient pleads insanity -prosecution of these cases	Michael Cleary MD	psychiatry tapes	1899	DSM diagnoses, highly associated with assaultive patients, include paranoid and antisocial personality disorders, and alcohol abuse. Prosecution of appropriate cases requires persistence, ability to overcome anticipated defense of insanity and reluctance by hospital and court administrators to support staff victims.
1992	Paroxysmal insanity as a murder defense in 1865	Allen Spiegel PhD Merrill Spiegel JD	psychology journal	983	This trial marked the first time that a paroxysmal insanity murder defense was supported by expert medical testimony in a U.S. courtroom. As is common today, experts were pitted against each other to persuade the jury. Aspects of the Harris/Burroughs murder case may yield clues as to the persistence of the attitudinal stances toward temporary insanity pleas by the mass media, mental health professionals, the legal profession and the public.
1992	Making of the insanity plea	Don Verger EdD	psychology journal	6058	Public reservations about the insanity plea stem from the vexing question of whether an unscrupulous defendant can feign mental illness where it does not exist; and, where it does exist, whether it is, in fact, an excuse rather than a reason for criminal behavior. Methods of ascertaining the probability of malingering, as well as determining whether the defendant did or did not have the capacity to exercise responsible behavior irrespective of mental illness are discussed.
1991	Use of sodium amytal in an insanity and diminished capacity defense	Elliot Atkins, Ed.D.	psychology tape	1846	Speakers differentiate the truth serum myth held by many and the facts about sodium amytal. They will show how sodium amytal can be admissible and useful, how they decided to use it and how the case turned out. A 27-year-old man was arrested after having shot and killed his estranged girlfriend with a semiautomatic weapon in a crowded bar. His defense attorney consulted the author in order to explore the possibility of an insanity or diminished capacity defense. The extensive evaluation is described. A taped sodium amytal interview, the nature and breadth of expert witness testimony and the issue of diminished capacity are discussed.
1991	Impact of John Hinckley's insanity plea on public and professional publication	Otto Wahl PhD Arthur Lincon Kaye	psychology journal	5305	Authors investigate the influence of John Hinckley, Jr.'s assassination attempt and subsequent insanity trial on popular and professional publication, the volume of articles related to the insanity defense.
1991	Insanity defense- case study and jury analysis	James Boudouris PhD	psychology journal	6065	A young Iowan male, with an assaultive criminal record, following a religious conversion, viciously murdered his girlfriend, saying later that he honestly believed he was attacking "the devil." The author had an opportunity to analyze the jury selection in this insanity case and reports the jury deliberations,interviews with jurors and credibility issues. In his discussion of the case he offers suggestions for an insanity defense to be successful.
1991	Paroxysmal insanity as a murder defense in 1865	Allen Spiegel JD	psychiatry journal	8042	no abstract
1991	Use of sodium amytal in an insanity and diminished capacity defense of a capital murder case	Gerald Cooke PD Margaret Cooke PhD	psychology journal	8149	no abstract
1991	Impact of John Hinckley's insanity plea on public and professional publication	Otto Wahl PhD Arthur Lincon Kaye	psychology journal	10083	Authors investigate the influence of John Hinckley, Jr.'s assassination attempt and subsequent insanity trial on popular and professional publication, the volume of articles related to the insanity defense.
1990	Multiple personality disorder - competency and the insanity defense	Joann Ondrovik, PhD	psychology tape	1766	The mental health profession itself has only recently rediscovered Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD), after a virtual century of rejection and misdiagnosis. The literature is replete with discussions of the rarity of MPD, the difficulty in diagnosing MPD and the recent resurgence of the MPD diagnosis. The absence of specific valid testing with established credibility and reliability places the criteria for diagnosis in the category of subjective. When the most current data available suggests that as high as 89 percent of MPD patients are not aware of the disorder upon clinical presentation, a strained legal argument can be made that MPD is iatrogenically created 89 percent of the time.
1990	Post-Hinckley views of the insanity defense	Otto F. Wahl, Ph.D.	psychology journal	6057	Ninety residents of a Northern Virginia community responded to a telephone survey concerning the Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity plea. The majority of respondents indicated agreement with basic principles of the NGRI plea but expressed concern that the plea would result in dangerous patients being released into the community. Results suggest that NGRI advocates no longer need to convince the public that the plea is appropriate to retain but still need to demonstrate that it can be carried out in a safe and competent way.
1990	Multiple personality disorder - competency and the insanity defense	Joann Ondrovik PhD David Hamilton JD, PhD	psychiatry journal	5187	The mental health profession itself has only recently rediscovered Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD), after a virtual century of rejection and misdiagnosis. The literature is replete with discussions of the rarity of MPD, the difficulty in diagnosing MPD and the recent resurgence of the MPD diagnosis. The absence of specific valid testing with established credibility and reliability places the criteria for diagnosis in the category of subjective. When the most current data available suggests that as high as 89 percent of MPD patients are not aware of the disorder upon clinical presentation, a strained legal argument can be made that MPD is iatrogenically created 89 percent of the time.
1989	Community release of insanity acquittees- comparison of models and current issues	Martha Lewis MD	psychiatry tapes	10210	Two basic models used in the US for release judicially committed patients and their supervision in the community.
1989	Not guilty by reason of insanity - guidelines for community readiness decisions	Donald A. Eisner, PhD, JD	psychology tape	10042	The state psychiatric hospital is the primary provider of assessment and treatment of patients found Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity. Before returning to the community, patients must be evaluated and recommended for release by both the hospital treatment team and the conditional release program of the county of commitment. There are no standardized criteria for making such evaluations. Each evaluator uses a different set of guidelines, resulting in conflicting recommendations to the court.
1987	Competency and insanity determinations, clinical and legal aspects	Christopher S. Norris, PhD	psychology tape	10184	Federal law has far-reaching effects as a model for various states revising their criminal codes. Speaker discusses impact on clinicians involved in forensic work. Current and long-rate effects discussed.
1985	Importance of relating the crime to mental illness in the issue of insanity	Robert Howell PhD	psychology journal	8118	no abstract
1984	The insanity defense- judicial perspectives	Chief Justice Herman Lum Supreme Court of Hawaii	psychiatry journal	6007	Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Hawaii, guest speaker at Am College of Forensic Psychiatry annual meeting, discusses interrelationships between legal and psychiatric professions, focusing on controversial nature of the insanity defense.
1984	Insanity defense reconsidered	Thomas Szasz MD	psychiatry journal	6062	We should regard every person accused of a crime as a moral agent. Show mercy but without a smoke screen of psychiatric rationalizations and a charade of psychiatric theatricals.
1984	Report on a survey on the insanity defense	Lillilan Imperi MD	psychiatry journal	5109	Some results: On the insanity issue, 92 respondents said that we need a test or standard for a criminal responsibility defense; 23 favored the abolition of the insanity defense. Another On psychiatric testimony: responses included, Psychiatrists must maintain their impartial position. Psychiatrists must learn the basics of law and courtroom procedure; must recognize their role. More explicit discussion of different models. Steeped in advocacy, attorney s attitudes are often in conflict with the non-advocate thinking of the psychiatrist.
1984	The temporary insanity defense	Robert Howell PhD	psychology journal	5128	The author briefly reviews the history of the insanity plea
1983	In defense of the insanity plea	Robert Howell PhD	psychology journal	5126	A succinct history of the plea, theoretical concepts underpinning the insanity test, burden and level of proof, data about the insanity defense; laws; a three-step requirement or qualifying as being not guilty because of insanity.
	Managing the growing insanity acquittee crisis in our public psychiatric hospitals	Vicki Roberts M.Ed. LPC			no abstract