Bloody Murder Test 2 Reading 3

What did Justice Cresswell rule in 1852 about words as provocation for killing?

He ruled that words or taunting language were not sufficient provocation to reduce a charge of murder to manslaughter. Even a killing in passion or intoxication was still murder if it was intentional and unprovoked.

What did Justice Keating reaffirm in 1869 regarding provocation?

He stated that mere words or gestures are never enough in law to reduce murder to manslaughter. The law requires that the provocation be such that a reasonable man might be driven to commit the act.

What broader moral theme did these rulings reflect?

A new moralizing emphasis on strengthening self-discipline, foresight, and reasonableness in the public, with the law serving as a tool to cultivate these values.

What growing concern accompanied this emphasis on responsibility?

Increased attention to the “criminally insane,” as society began focusing on offenders who could not live up to the heightened demand for rational self-control.

What law first established a special verdict of insanity?

The Criminal Lunatics Act of 1800, following James Hadfield’s attempted assassination of King George III.

What did the 1800 Criminal Lunatics Act require?

That those acquitted due to insanity be held in strict custody until the King’s pleasure was known, ensuring indefinite confinement instead of release.

What did the Act represent in terms of balance between humanity and security?

It offered a “middle path” — appearing humane by avoiding punishment of the insane, but effectively increasing state control through automatic confinement.

How did insanity verdicts and defenses change after 1800?

They did not increase significantly; insanity pleas remained rare and had about the same success rate, showing the law’s continued focus on responsibility and deterrence.

When did criminal lunacy become a major public issue?

In the 1840s, with the rise of psychiatry, state involvement in asylums, and sensational insanity trials.

What did the Lunatics Acts of 1845 accomplish?

They established a permanent national lunacy commission and required counties to build asylums, reflecting growing public and governmental concern with insanity.

Which two major trials brought insanity to public attention in the 1840s?

The trials of Edward Oxford (1840) and Daniel McNaughten (1843).

What was Edward Oxford’s defense and outcome?

He was diagnosed with hereditary moral insanity, found not guilty by reason of insanity, and committed to Bethlem Asylum.

What was significant about Daniel McNaughten’s trial?

His defense invoked “irresistible impulses,” supported by medical testimony, leading to public alarm and the creation of the McNaughten Rules.

What are the McNaughten Rules?

They stated that a person is not legally responsible only if, at the time of the act, they did not know it was wrong or illegal — emphasizing reason and moral awareness.

Why were the McNaughten Rules created?

To restrict the insanity defense and reaffirm the idea of rational, responsible individuals after public concern that “insanity” was being misused.

How did judges react to the concept of “irresistible impulse”?

They strongly rejected it, fearing it could excuse nearly any crime; judges like Baron Parke and Baron Bramwell insisted that moral control must always be expected.

What did Baron Bramwell argue about mad offenders?

He believed that the insane needed the fear of punishment even more than others and that hanging should still apply — “mad or not mad.”

What did J. F. Stephen argue about impulses and responsibility?

That the law’s purpose was to teach people to control their impulses — even insane ones — and that disease or irritation did not excuse murder.

How did Home Secretary Sir George Grey handle insanity pleas in capital cases?

He rarely granted reprieves for insanity, insisting that clear intent showed responsibility, even if the accused had a history of good character.

What controversy surrounded the George Victor Townley case (1863)?

Townley, who killed his fiancée, had his death sentence reprieved on grounds of insanity, sparking public outrage over perceived favoritism for the wealthy.

What legal change followed the Townley case?

New rules prevented defendants from choosing justices to certify insanity and required that reprieved prisoners found sane be returned to prison for punishment.

How did the McNaughten Rules and later policy handle insanity overall?

They recognized insanity legally but tightly controlled it, preventing it from weakening the doctrine of personal responsibility.

By the 1860s, what was the overall trend in Victorian law?

The law increasingly emphasized impersonal rules and individual accountability — using legal structures to promote self-discipline and moral character.