The Role of Mental Illness in Court

Introduction to Mental Illness in Court

• Key Learning Objectives:
  • Understanding presumptions in Canada’s legal system.
  • Discussing Canada’s fitness standard and its implications.
  • Exploring insanity standards in Canada.
  • Understanding automatism and its legal examples.
  • Analyzing how mental illness relates to offender populations and violence.
  • Exploring options for addressing offenders with mental disorders.

Case Study: Blake Bordeau

• Blake Bordeau, adopted at 2, diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia.
• Struggled with medication compliance, leading to a severe decline in mental health.
• Charged with the murder of a police officer after significant behavioral changes (e.g., hearing voices).
• Highlights the relationship between mental illness and criminal behavior.

Presumptions in Canada’s Legal System (Learning Objective 1)

• Foundational Concepts:
  • Actus Reus: Wrongful deed (the act).
  • Mens Rea: Criminal intent (the mental state).
• Mental health conditions challenge the determination of these foundational concepts in law.
• Common Myths Related to Mental Illness:
  • Myth 1: Mentally ill individuals are more criminally inclined.
  • Myth 2: Most violent offenders utilize the insanity defense.
  • Myth 3: Mentally ill offenders cannot be rehabilitated.
  • Myth 4: Incarceration is the only option for the mentally ill in crimes.
  • Myth 5: Mental illnesses warrant jail time instead of institutional care.

Fitness to Stand Trial (Learning Objective 2)

• Definition:
  • A defendant's ability to conduct a defense due to mental illness.
• Criteria for determining fitness include:
  1. Understanding the nature of proceedings.
  2. Communicating with counsel.
  3. Understanding possible consequences.
• Relevant Legislation: Bill C-30 (1992) established fitness standards detailed in the Criminal Code.
• Evaluation: Average evaluation times ~3 weeks, mostly in inpatient settings.
• Assumption of Fitness: A defendant is assumed fit unless proven unfit by the raising party's balance of probabilities.

Insanity Standard (Learning Objective 3)

• Canada’s Current Standard: Not Criminally Responsible on account of Mental Disorder (NCRMD).
• Key Elements of Insanity:
  1. Suffering from a mental disorder affecting reasoning (McNaughton Rule).
  2. Not knowing the nature/quality of their act.
  3. Not knowing the act was wrong.
• Judicial Oversight: Review boards oversee individuals found NCRMD, determining ongoing care and treatment needs.

Automatism (Learning Objective 4)

• Definition: Unconscious, involuntary behavior where the individual is unaware.
• Types:
  • Noninsane automatism: External factors.
  • Insane automatism: Linked to mental disorder.
• Legal Examples: Kenneth Parks case involved sleepwalking; R. v. Stone established criteria for judging automatism defenses.

Mental Illness in Offender Populations (Learning Objective 5)

• Prevalence:
  • High rates of mental illness among offenders; reports show >40% in federal prisons.
  • Mental health conditions often co-occur (e.g., substance use issues are common alongside psychiatric diagnoses).
• Why High Rates?
  1. Arrest rates discrepancy.
  2. Effect of mental illness on crime commission.
  3. Misunderstandings about the legal system leading to guilty pleas.

Treatment for Offenders with Mental Disorders (Learning Objective 6)

• Objectives:
  1. Symptom reduction and improved coping strategies.
  2. Decreased length of stays in educational and psychiatric settings.
  3. Community reintegration initiatives.
• Mental Health Courts: Developed to provide alternatives to traditional judicial processes; focus on rehabilitating rather than punishing.
• Treatment Efficacy: Research supports their implementation, showing potential reduction in recidivism and improved mental health outcomes.

Summary Points

1. Fitness Evaluation: A defendant is considered unfit if they can’t understand proceedings or communicate with legal counsel due to mental disorder.
2. Insanity Standard: NCRMD reflects a defendant's lack of responsibility due to incapacity to understand their actions during the crime.
3. Automatism Defense: Provides legal exemption for unconscious actions due to mental health conditions or external triggers.
4. Offender Mental Health Rates: High prevalence in offender populations indicating systemic issues requiring multi-faceted interventions.
5. Treatment Goals: Include symptom management, reducing recidivism, and facilitating social reintegration.