Identifying insanity acquittals: is it any easier?

Following the highly publicized insanity acquittal of John Hinckley in 1982, legislators throughout the country attempted to reform the insanity defense. At the time, policy makers had virtually no empirical evidence with which to guide their reforms. The focus of this research is to determine if more informed policy-making would be possible today? Results show that more states are able to identify cases involving an insanity acquittal than during the 1980's and provide annual data on the number of rate of insanity acquittals.

Revisiting the insanity defense: contested or consensus?

The author assesses the accuracy of both the public's opinion and researchers' conclusions regarding the method of adjudication of insanity cases and investigates the impact of the various types of reforms enacted in the 1980s on the degree to which insanity cases are contested. Data from seven states are analyzed. The public's view that insanity cases are typically resolved by a jury trial is inaccurate.

Rates of insanity acquittals and the factors associated with successful insanity pleas.

The frequency of use of the insanity plea, the probability of being acquitted by reason of insanity given the plea has been used, and the overall volume of insanity acquittees was determined for seven states. Across the seven states, there was an inverse relationship (r = -.67) between the frequency of use and the likelihood of success.