Connection lost
Server error
It's every lawyer's dream to help shape the law, not just react to it.
✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+
Legal Definitions - M'naghten rule
Definition of M'naghten rule
The M'naghten rule is a legal standard used in some jurisdictions to determine if a defendant can be held criminally responsible for their actions due to mental illness. It is one of the oldest and most stringent tests for criminal insanity.
Under the M'naghten rule, a person is presumed to be sane unless they can prove that, at the time they committed the criminal act, a mental disease or defect prevented them from:
- Not knowing the nature and quality of their act: This means the person did not understand what they were physically doing. For example, they might have believed they were performing a completely different action than what actually occurred.
- Knowing that what they were doing was wrong: This means the person understood the physical act they were committing, but due to their mental illness, they did not know that the act was morally or legally wrong.
If a defendant successfully proves either of these conditions, they may be found "not guilty by reason of insanity" and typically committed to a mental health facility rather than prison.
Here are some examples illustrating the M'naghten rule:
Example 1 (Not knowing the nature and quality of the act): Imagine a person suffering from a severe psychotic episode who believes they are a character in a video game. In an attempt to "level up," they physically attack a stranger on the street. When questioned, they genuinely perceive the stranger as a virtual enemy and the act as part of a game, not as a real-world assault on another human being.
Explanation: In this scenario, the individual physically committed an assault. However, due to their profound delusion, they did not understand the true nature and quality of their actions – they believed they were interacting within a game, not harming a real person. This would satisfy the first prong of the M'naghten rule.
Example 2 (Knowing the act, but not knowing it was wrong): Consider an individual with a deeply entrenched paranoid delusion who believes that a specific government agency is implanting harmful devices into people's brains through their local water supply. Convinced that they are saving lives, this person sabotages a local water treatment plant. They understand that they are tampering with the plant's machinery, but in their delusional state, they believe this act is morally righteous and necessary, not a criminal act of destruction.
Explanation: Here, the person knew they were physically interfering with the water treatment plant. However, their severe delusion led them to believe that this act was not wrong, but rather a heroic and justified action to prevent harm. This would satisfy the second prong of the M'naghten rule, as they did not know their actions were wrong.
Simple Definition
The M'naghten rule is the oldest legal test for criminal insanity, originating in England in 1843. Under this test, a defendant is considered legally insane if, at the time of committing a crime, they either did not know the nature and quality of their act, or knew what they were doing but did not know it was wrong. This rule remains a standard for insanity defenses in many jurisdictions.