There's a well established legal defense known as "not guilty by reason of insanity" and psychosis is an accepted reason for that decision, because it's about a break with reality.
So the trial was to decide if that law applied. Massachusetts also has a weird approach where it's on the prosecution to prove the accused was sane rather than on the defendent to prove that they were insane.
p
There's a well established legal defense known as "not guilty by reason of insanity" and psychosis is an accepted reason for that decision, because it's about a break with reality.
So the trial was to decide if that law applied. Massachusetts also has a weird approach where it's on the prosecution to prove the accused was sane rather than on the defendent to prove that they were insane.
More options
Context Copy link